[Bug tree-optimization/110992] [14 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression at -O3 since r14-1654-g7ceed7e3e29

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110992

--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
What we had before in GCC 13:
  # RANGE [irange] unsigned short [0, 1] NONZERO 0x1
  d.3_19 = (unsigned short) _3;
  _21 = -d.3_19;
  _22 = (short intD.17) _21;
  _6 = (short intD.17) b.0_1;
  _7 = _6 & _22;

Which then after  r14-1654-g7ceed7e3e29 gives us:
 _t = (short intD.17) d.3_19
 _7 = _6 * _t

What we get after that match patch:
  _3 = c.1_2 != 0;
  _25 = (short intD.17) _3;
  _22 = -_25;
  _6 = (short intD.17) b.0_1;
  _7 = _6 & _22;

That is we lose the range information.
If I add this to match.pd:
```
diff --git a/gcc/match.pd b/gcc/match.pd
index 97db0eb5f25..e68e2c57e25 100644
--- a/gcc/match.pd
+++ b/gcc/match.pd
@@ -2181,6 +2181,9 @@ DEFINE_INT_AND_FLOAT_ROUND_FN (RINT)
       && (TYPE_UNSIGNED (type)
          || TYPE_PRECISION (type) > 1))))

+(match zero_one_valued_p
+ (convert@0 zero_one_valued_p@1))
+
 /* Transform { 0 or 1 } * { 0 or 1 } into { 0 or 1 } & { 0 or 1 }.  */
 (simplify
  (mult zero_one_valued_p@0 zero_one_valued_p@1)

```

Then this fails again.
I am thinking about adding this anyways so I am going to keep this one open.