Rewrite part of and_comparisons_1 into match.pd.

2019-09-16  Martin Liska  <mliska@suse.cz>

	* genmatch.c (dt_node::append_simplify): Do not print
	warning when we have duplicate patterns belonging
	to a same simplify rule.
	* gimple-fold.c (and_comparisons_1): Remove matching moved to match.pd.
	(maybe_fold_comparisons_from_match_pd): Handle
	tcc_comparison as a results.
	* match.pd: Handle (X == CST1) && (X OP2 CST2) conditions.

From-SVN: r275750

4 files changed, 92 insertions, 131 deletions

diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog b/gcc/ChangeLog
index 3bb3837..cc3a397 100644
--- a/gcc/ChangeLog
+++ b/gcc/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,13 @@
+2019-09-16  Martin Liska  <mliska@suse.cz>
+
+	* genmatch.c (dt_node::append_simplify): Do not print
+	warning when we have duplicate patterns belonging
+	to a same simplify rule.
+	* gimple-fold.c (and_comparisons_1): Remove matching moved to match.pd.
+	(maybe_fold_comparisons_from_match_pd): Handle
+	tcc_comparison as a results.
+	* match.pd: Handle (X == CST1) && (X OP2 CST2) conditions.
+
 2019-09-16  Li Jia He  <helijia@linux.ibm.com>
 	    Qi Feng  <ffengqi@linux.ibm.com>
 
diff --git a/gcc/genmatch.c b/gcc/genmatch.c
index 2e7bf27..cede432 100644
--- a/gcc/genmatch.c
+++ b/gcc/genmatch.c
@@ -1894,10 +1894,15 @@ dt_node *
 dt_node::append_simplify (simplify *s, unsigned pattern_no,
 			  dt_operand **indexes)
 {
+  dt_simplify *s2;
   dt_simplify *n = new dt_simplify (s, pattern_no, indexes);
   for (unsigned i = 0; i < kids.length (); ++i)
-    if (dt_simplify *s2 = dyn_cast <dt_simplify *> (kids[i]))
+    if ((s2 = dyn_cast <dt_simplify *> (kids[i]))
+	&& (verbose >= 1
+	    || s->match->location != s2->s->match->location))
       {
+	/* With a nested patters, it's hard to avoid these in order
+	   to keep match.pd rules relatively small.  */
 	warning_at (s->match->location, "duplicate pattern");
 	warning_at (s2->s->match->location, "previous pattern defined here");
 	print_operand (s->match, stderr);
diff --git a/gcc/gimple-fold.c b/gcc/gimple-fold.c
index 6d9ba36..f82bedc 100644
--- a/gcc/gimple-fold.c
+++ b/gcc/gimple-fold.c
@@ -5620,136 +5620,6 @@ and_comparisons_1 (tree type, enum tree_code code1, tree op1a, tree op1b,
 	return t;
     }
 
-  /* If both comparisons are of the same value against constants, we might
-     be able to merge them.  */
-  if (operand_equal_p (op1a, op2a, 0)
-      && TREE_CODE (op1b) == INTEGER_CST
-      && TREE_CODE (op2b) == INTEGER_CST)
-    {
-      int cmp = tree_int_cst_compare (op1b, op2b);
-
-      /* If we have (op1a == op1b), we should either be able to
-	 return that or FALSE, depending on whether the constant op1b
-	 also satisfies the other comparison against op2b.  */
-      if (code1 == EQ_EXPR)
-	{
-	  bool done = true;
-	  bool val;
-	  switch (code2)
-	    {
-	    case EQ_EXPR: val = (cmp == 0); break;
-	    case NE_EXPR: val = (cmp != 0); break;
-	    case LT_EXPR: val = (cmp < 0); break;
-	    case GT_EXPR: val = (cmp > 0); break;
-	    case LE_EXPR: val = (cmp <= 0); break;
-	    case GE_EXPR: val = (cmp >= 0); break;
-	    default: done = false;
-	    }
-	  if (done)
-	    {
-	      if (val)
-		return fold_build2 (code1, boolean_type_node, op1a, op1b);
-	      else
-		return boolean_false_node;
-	    }
-	}
-      /* Likewise if the second comparison is an == comparison.  */
-      else if (code2 == EQ_EXPR)
-	{
-	  bool done = true;
-	  bool val;
-	  switch (code1)
-	    {
-	    case EQ_EXPR: val = (cmp == 0); break;
-	    case NE_EXPR: val = (cmp != 0); break;
-	    case LT_EXPR: val = (cmp > 0); break;
-	    case GT_EXPR: val = (cmp < 0); break;
-	    case LE_EXPR: val = (cmp >= 0); break;
-	    case GE_EXPR: val = (cmp <= 0); break;
-	    default: done = false;
-	    }
-	  if (done)
-	    {
-	      if (val)
-		return fold_build2 (code2, boolean_type_node, op2a, op2b);
-	      else
-		return boolean_false_node;
-	    }
-	}
-
-      /* Same business with inequality tests.  */
-      else if (code1 == NE_EXPR)
-	{
-	  bool val;
-	  switch (code2)
-	    {
-	    case EQ_EXPR: val = (cmp != 0); break;
-	    case NE_EXPR: val = (cmp == 0); break;
-	    case LT_EXPR: val = (cmp >= 0); break;
-	    case GT_EXPR: val = (cmp <= 0); break;
-	    case LE_EXPR: val = (cmp > 0); break;
-	    case GE_EXPR: val = (cmp < 0); break;
-	    default:
-	      val = false;
-	    }
-	  if (val)
-	    return fold_build2 (code2, boolean_type_node, op2a, op2b);
-	}
-      else if (code2 == NE_EXPR)
-	{
-	  bool val;
-	  switch (code1)
-	    {
-	    case EQ_EXPR: val = (cmp == 0); break;
-	    case NE_EXPR: val = (cmp != 0); break;
-	    case LT_EXPR: val = (cmp <= 0); break;
-	    case GT_EXPR: val = (cmp >= 0); break;
-	    case LE_EXPR: val = (cmp < 0); break;
-	    case GE_EXPR: val = (cmp > 0); break;
-	    default:
-	      val = false;
-	    }
-	  if (val)
-	    return fold_build2 (code1, boolean_type_node, op1a, op1b);
-	}
-
-      /* Chose the more restrictive of two < or <= comparisons.  */
-      else if ((code1 == LT_EXPR || code1 == LE_EXPR)
-	       && (code2 == LT_EXPR || code2 == LE_EXPR))
-	{
-	  if ((cmp < 0) || (cmp == 0 && code1 == LT_EXPR))
-	    return fold_build2 (code1, boolean_type_node, op1a, op1b);
-	  else
-	    return fold_build2 (code2, boolean_type_node, op2a, op2b);
-	}
-
-      /* Likewise chose the more restrictive of two > or >= comparisons.  */
-      else if ((code1 == GT_EXPR || code1 == GE_EXPR)
-	       && (code2 == GT_EXPR || code2 == GE_EXPR))
-	{
-	  if ((cmp > 0) || (cmp == 0 && code1 == GT_EXPR))
-	    return fold_build2 (code1, boolean_type_node, op1a, op1b);
-	  else
-	    return fold_build2 (code2, boolean_type_node, op2a, op2b);
-	}
-
-      /* Check for singleton ranges.  */
-      else if (cmp == 0
-	       && ((code1 == LE_EXPR && code2 == GE_EXPR)
-		   || (code1 == GE_EXPR && code2 == LE_EXPR)))
-	return fold_build2 (EQ_EXPR, boolean_type_node, op1a, op2b);
-
-      /* Check for disjoint ranges. */
-      else if (cmp <= 0
-	       && (code1 == LT_EXPR || code1 == LE_EXPR)
-	       && (code2 == GT_EXPR || code2 == GE_EXPR))
-	return boolean_false_node;
-      else if (cmp >= 0
-	       && (code1 == GT_EXPR || code1 == GE_EXPR)
-	       && (code2 == LT_EXPR || code2 == LE_EXPR))
-	return boolean_false_node;
-    }
-
   /* Perhaps the first comparison is (NAME != 0) or (NAME == 1) where
      NAME's definition is a truth value.  See if there are any simplifications
      that can be done against the NAME's definition.  */
@@ -5899,6 +5769,16 @@ maybe_fold_comparisons_from_match_pd (tree type, enum tree_code code,
 	  else
 	    return res;
 	}
+      else if (op.code.is_tree_code ()
+	       && TREE_CODE_CLASS ((tree_code)op.code) == tcc_comparison)
+	{
+	  tree op0 = op.ops[0];
+	  tree op1 = op.ops[1];
+	  if (op0 == lhs1 || op0 == lhs2 || op1 == lhs1 || op1 == lhs2)
+	    return NULL_TREE;  /* not simple */
+
+	  return build2 ((enum tree_code)op.code, op.type, op0, op1);
+	}
     }
 
   return NULL_TREE;
diff --git a/gcc/match.pd b/gcc/match.pd
index 2ca8800..ac80dd7 100644
--- a/gcc/match.pd
+++ b/gcc/match.pd
@@ -1958,6 +1958,72 @@ DEFINE_INT_AND_FLOAT_ROUND_FN (RINT)
     (if (eqne == NE_EXPR)
      { constant_boolean_node (true, type); }))))
 
+/* Convert (X == CST1) && (X OP2 CST2) to a known value
+   based on CST1 OP2 CST2.  Similarly for (X != CST1).  */
+
+(for code1 (eq ne)
+ (for code2 (eq ne lt gt le ge)
+  (simplify
+   (bit_and:c (code1@3 @0 INTEGER_CST@1) (code2@4 @0 INTEGER_CST@2))
+    (with
+     {
+      int cmp = tree_int_cst_compare (@1, @2);
+      bool val;
+      switch (code2)
+	 {
+	case EQ_EXPR: val = (cmp == 0); break;
+	case NE_EXPR: val = (cmp != 0); break;
+	case LT_EXPR: val = (cmp < 0); break;
+	case GT_EXPR: val = (cmp > 0); break;
+	case LE_EXPR: val = (cmp <= 0); break;
+	case GE_EXPR: val = (cmp >= 0); break;
+	default: gcc_unreachable ();
+	}
+     }
+     (switch
+      (if (code1 == EQ_EXPR && val) @3)
+      (if (code1 == EQ_EXPR && !val) { constant_boolean_node (false, type); })
+      (if (code1 == NE_EXPR && !val) @4))))))
+
+/* Convert (X OP1 CST1) && (X OP2 CST2).  */
+
+(for code1 (lt le gt ge)
+ (for code2 (lt le gt ge)
+  (simplify
+  (bit_and (code1:c@3 @0 INTEGER_CST@1) (code2:c@4 @0 INTEGER_CST@2))
+   (with
+    {
+     int cmp = tree_int_cst_compare (@1, @2);
+    }
+    (switch
+     /* Choose the more restrictive of two < or <= comparisons.  */
+     (if ((code1 == LT_EXPR || code1 == LE_EXPR)
+	  && (code2 == LT_EXPR || code2 == LE_EXPR))
+      (if ((cmp < 0) || (cmp == 0 && code1 == LT_EXPR))
+       @3
+       @4))
+     /* Likewise chose the more restrictive of two > or >= comparisons.  */
+     (if ((code1 == GT_EXPR || code1 == GE_EXPR)
+	  && (code2 == GT_EXPR || code2 == GE_EXPR))
+      (if ((cmp > 0) || (cmp == 0 && code1 == GT_EXPR))
+       @3
+       @4))
+     /* Check for singleton ranges.  */
+     (if (cmp == 0
+	  && ((code1 == LE_EXPR && code2 == GE_EXPR)
+	    || (code1 == GE_EXPR && code2 == LE_EXPR)))
+      (eq @0 @1))
+     /* Check for disjoint ranges.  */
+     (if (cmp <= 0
+	  && (code1 == LT_EXPR || code1 == LE_EXPR)
+	  && (code2 == GT_EXPR || code2 == GE_EXPR))
+      { constant_boolean_node (false, type); })
+     (if (cmp >= 0
+	  && (code1 == GT_EXPR || code1 == GE_EXPR)
+	  && (code2 == LT_EXPR || code2 == LE_EXPR))
+      { constant_boolean_node (false, type); })
+     )))))
+
 /* We can't reassociate at all for saturating types.  */
 (if (!TYPE_SATURATING (type))