https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978
--- Comment #42 from Chen Chen <chz0808 at gmail dot com> --- (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #39) > (In reply to Chen Chen from comment #38) > > (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #37) > > > So if we revert r15-7525 now, would things work normally with just > > > r15-6657? > > > If so I'd suggest to revert r15-7525 (now or when GCC 16 stage 1 starts) > > > and > > > close this as a PR114932 dup. > > > > Why revert r15-7525? In its description it never mentions 548.exchange2_r. > > See comment 19. r15-7525 was intended for work this around. > > > And it is beneficial to have an option to adjust addr-reg-reg cost. Anyway > > one can set "-maddr-reg-reg-cost=1" if exaggerating the cost is not needed > > or prefered. > > Because on LA464 and LA664 the cost of LDX/STX isn't really so high. > > Or we should keep the option but change the default of -maddr-reg-reg-cost > back to 1. I think it is better to keep the option in case we need it. I do not mind setting the default of -maddr-reg-reg-cost to 1 or 3.
