https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
--- Comment #19 from Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16) > Tamar's explanation why #c0 gcc 14 code is better than gcc 15: > "the mov is a zero latency instruction. sxtw, asr and sbfx themselves are > aliases to the same thing" Target-specific, yes. And the insn_cost of the mov isn't lower than that of other insns :-( (Or is it? That part of the combine dump isn't here).
