https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90249
--- Comment #3 from Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #2) > What difference is there on some code of significant size? Do you see > regressions then? > > Of course there are some tiny examples where it now does worse, just like > there are examples where it now does better. Across the entirety of CSiBE thumb2 regresses by 0.05% (tested by effectively disabling r265398 on tip of tree). It seems to be specific to Thumb2 code, though. Thumb1 and Arm code now get worse when that specific patch is disabled. Though all three are still worse than gcc-8 overall.
