https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101301
--- Comment #8 from Thomas Koenig <tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #7) > Yeah :-) Of course in your testing the nine named cases have the same > probability, > which is not very true in practice (but is there any better guess possible), > and > the "default" case has that same probability for GCC (is there a better > estimate > for that, maybe?) I think that we should leave something to do for the hardware branch predictors. Any pattern should lead to better predictions. The test case is rather brutal because it is random. > (I expect there just is some typo or thinko somewhere in the pass, fwiw :-) ) As I have demonstrated above, such a thinko is rather easy to make :-)
