"Paulo J. Matos" <pocma...@gmail.com> writes: > On 09/02/11 15:57, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > >> For your processor it sounds like you should make a constant more >> expensive than a register for an outer code of SET. You're right that >> the cost should really depend on the destination of the set but >> unfortunately I don't know if you will see that. > > Increasing the cost of constants slightly for outer code set actually > works. It blocks cse from doing the transformation but then gcse comes > and does the transformation without consulting costs. That makes the > cost change pretty useless.
Bother. I've encountered that problem before and I think I used a sledgehammer (a local patch). It's definitely a bug that gcse doesn't consider costs. Ian
