The "y^((y^z)&x)" method is already branchless, and close in performance to the Zicond variant, is my point; i.e. Zicond doesn't actually add much.
Also that isn't actually equivalent since `x` needs to be all 1s or all 0s surely? Neither GCC nor Clang use that method, but they do use Zicond.
Indeed you may need to negate `x` if you have only the LSB set in it; hence "3-4 instrs ... depending on the format you have the condition in" in my original message.
I assume gcc & clang just haven't bothered considering the branchless baseline impl, rather than it being particularly bad.
Note that there's another way some RISC-V hardware supports doing branchless conditional stores - a jump over a move instr (or in some cases, even some arithmetic instructions), which they internally convert to a branchless update.