https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62151
Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11 from Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
With the patch in #c10, insn 30/71/72 (from #c7) are now combined, hiding
the problem. It looks like the problematic situation can still happen
though, with some very improbable instruction sequence (the three-insn
combination has to be more expensive than the original first three insns,
but the three-insn combination and the four-insn combination together have
to be cheaper than the original four insns).
