https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359
--- Comment #6 from Fredrik Hederstierna <fredrik.hederstie...@securitas-direct.com> --- Thanks for your analysis on this. One comment on this 'complaint', it's not only about size - in my example the compiler uses 2 more regs push and pop, and several more instructions, so I think causing performance regressions aswell? I can file the 'complaints' as performance degradations next time if this is better. Actually this was derived from a larger code base analysis (CSiBE) Bug 61578 - [4.9 regression] Code size increase for ARM thumb compared to 4.8.x when compiling with -Os Where CSiBE problems was analysed, but this issue unfortunately got too fuzzy where its hard to define an issue on almost 1000 files, the conclusion was then to create separate smaller examples to work on, because the CSiBE overall benchmark was hard to overview. I understand its much focus on performance speed on GCC development, but I do think that size really is important aswell since GCC is used very widely also for typically ARM based embedded systems. I will continue to try track size on CSiBE on http://gcc.hederstierna.com/csibe, but please comment if you think size regressions are non-wanted, I can try to focus more on issues that have both performance speed and size components combined (I guess they often go hand in hand.). Thanks, BR, Fredrik
