https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763
--- Comment #24 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #22) > Wonder though if it wouldn't give the RA more choices by also including > another > &r <- (r, m) alternative with bmi2 isa attribute. This would be worse than r <- (0, m) alternative on register starved x86_32 architecture. The above approach can use up to 6 registers, while r <- (0, m) uses up to 4.
