https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117574
--- Comment #7 from Sam James <sjames at gcc dot gnu.org> --- For completeness: 9 started with r9-2287-g47ca20b4f69986 (i.e. we got better at optimising and exposed it).
sjames at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs Thu, 14 Nov 2024 19:19:49 -0800
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117574
--- Comment #7 from Sam James <sjames at gcc dot gnu.org> --- For completeness: 9 started with r9-2287-g47ca20b4f69986 (i.e. we got better at optimising and exposed it).