https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96750
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #2) > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1) > > after: > > 1794240.0 > > > > before: > > 1802710.0 > > That's less than 1% of difference (with "after" better than "before"), not > the 10% regression claimed, maybe there is another relevant commit? Sorry, I copied bad numbers: after: 1806140.0 before: 1705630.0 which is ~6% regression.