Tagging subscribers to this area: @JulieLeeMSFT
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

@kunalspathak @jakobbotsch This is ready.

This is a trivial change and the diffs look good; though there are not very many of them.

though there are not very many of them.

Do you know why? I am asking to make sure that we know if these changes are good enough to catch the scenarios or did we miss something.

You can probably take some methods that were improved in arm64 work and not in x64 and then compare what make us generate differently?

I think the reason is that this optimization also happens in lowering for x64 where as for ARM64 it does not: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/src/coreclr/jit/lower.cpp#L5556

I think the reason is that this optimization also happens in lowering for x64 where as for ARM64 it does not: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/src/coreclr/jit/lower.cpp#L5556

So we were covering x64 but just missed few opportunities that we are also covering with this PR. Is that the case? Wonder what prohibited us from covering those scenarios in x64 prior to your PR.

So we were covering x64 but just missed few opportunities that we are also covering with this PR. Is that the case?

That was my thinking. It's similar to SubMulDiv optimization for 'mod' since that exists in both morph and lowering.

Wonder what prohibited us from covering those scenarios in x64 prior to your PR.

Probably just low hanging fruit.

@kunalspathak is there anything that needs to be done in this PR?

No worries thank you! :)