[Bug target/43052] Inline memcmp is *much* slower than glibc's

[hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43052

--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-07-04 10:11:03 UTC ---
H.J,
if glibc implementation beats gcc even for size of 4, I guess we could just
drop the pattern or enable at at -Os only.
Or are there easy cases we want to inline, like we do for memcpy?

Unlike memcpy, memcmp/strcmp is more difficult to handle because the amount of
memory it will process is harder to estimate. I guess still with known
alignment and/or small upper bound of object size, inline code would be a win.