This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug target/49263] SH Target: underutilized "TST #imm, R0" instruction
- From: "kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 01:31:42 +0000
- Subject: [Bug target/49263] SH Target: underutilized "TST #imm, R0" instruction
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-49263-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49263
--- Comment #8 from Kazumoto Kojima <kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-10-10 01:31:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Option 2 seems more robust even if it seems less effective, what do you think?
Another combine pass to reduce size less than 0.3% on one target
would be not acceptable, I guess. ~10 new patterns would be
overkill for that result, though I'm still expecting that a few
patterns of them were dominant. Could you get numbers which pattern
was used in the former option?