On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 04:24:50PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 3:50 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Wrong example. It should be >> > >> > lea 0x400(%edx, %ecx, 8), %edx >> > >> > we get >> > >> > add %ecx, %edx >> > add %ecx, %edx >> > add %ecx, %edx >> > add %ecx, %edx >> > add %ecx, %edx >> > add %ecx, %edx >> > add %ecx, %edx >> > add %ecx, %edx >> > add $0x400, %edx >> >> Even for this example, the code can be substantially improved: >> >> shl $3, %ecx >> add %ecx, %edx >> add $0x400, %edx > > Only if ecx is dead after the statement.
True. Do we have this information at the point transformation is performed? Uros.
