https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79491
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |missed-optimization Target| |x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-* Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed| |2017-02-14 Component|c |target Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- I think that on most archs the cost of unaligned _loads_ are not too bad but aligning stores can still free up store bandwith. Unfortunately x86 globs unaligned load/store into one parameter in its cost tables: case unaligned_load: case unaligned_store: return ix86_cost->vec_unalign_load_cost; thus confirmed as x86 specific cost model issue.