Kevin McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If you look closely, you can see that %edi can be automatically loaded > directly without problems, and that (%eax) can be directly loaded into > (%esp). Is this behavior intentional (for bugs I don't know about in > earlier processors) or could this optimization be fixed to use less > instructions?
>From the code you presented, I expect this optimization can be fixed. But it's difficult to work with an incomplete program fragment. Please open a PR at http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ with the complete preprocessed source code for a file showing the problem. Thanks. Ian
