This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug tree-optimization/69376] [6 Regression] wrong code at -Os and above on x86_64-linux-gnu
- From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 14:14:22 +0000
- Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/69376] [6 Regression] wrong code at -Os and above on x86_64-linux-gnu
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-69376-4 at http dot gcc dot gnu dot org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69376
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Bernd Schmidt from comment #8)
> Why not put this bit into range_info_def so as to not have the information
> scattered across two different places? Seems like it would be more robust
> and more readable.
It would, but it would increase the size of it by 64 bits. As we want to use
these more and more, even for IPA VRP, the memory footprint of the range info
matters.