http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845
--- Comment #13 from Oleg Endo <olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-11-08 01:08:51 UTC --- (In reply to comment #12) > (In reply to comment #11) > > > Do you have any particular example in mind? > > Just compare the size & performance of the code generated from fp-bit.c with > the hand-coded asm. Also observe how comparisons for the latter are lighter > on the caller as less registers are clobbered. OK, I get the point (not much to compare -- it's pretty obvious). Maybe it would make sense to transition the sh soft fp stuff step by step (insn by insn) from the generic fp-bit to custom fp code...
