It is impossible for (x & INT_MAX) == 0 && x == INT_MAX to ever be true.
While this sort of reasoning should normally live in InstSimplify,
the machinery that derives this result is not trivial to split out.
llvm-svn: 222230
// whole construct
if (((BCst->getValue() & DCst->getValue()) &
(CCst->getValue() ^ ECst->getValue())) != 0)
- return nullptr;
+ return ConstantInt::get(LHS->getType(), !IsAnd);
Value *newOr1 = Builder->CreateOr(B, D);
Value *newOr2 = ConstantExpr::getOr(CCst, ECst);
Value *newAnd = Builder->CreateAnd(A, newOr1);
%val = or i1 %tst1, %tst2
ret i1 %val
}
+
+define i1 @fold_mask_cmps_to_false(i32 %x) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: @fold_mask_cmps_to_false
+; CHECK: ret i1 false
+ %1 = and i32 %x, 2147483647
+ %2 = icmp eq i32 %1, 0
+ %3 = icmp eq i32 %x, 2147483647
+ %4 = and i1 %3, %2
+ ret i1 %4
+}
+
+define i1 @fold_mask_cmps_to_true(i32 %x) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: @fold_mask_cmps_to_true
+; CHECK: ret i1 true
+ %1 = and i32 %x, 2147483647
+ %2 = icmp ne i32 %1, 0
+ %3 = icmp ne i32 %x, 2147483647
+ %4 = or i1 %3, %2
+ ret i1 %4
+}