https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87871
--- Comment #53 from Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #51) > In the more general case splitting this would produce worse code, not > better, since then we'd end up with two instructions rather than one. Sure, it _often_ is good to have it merged. Quite clearly more often than not it's good, so if you have to pick only one way, this is the way to go. Hopefully we can do better though. But not for stage 4, sure.
