https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120221
--- Comment #5 from Christophe Jaillet
---
Created attachment 61406
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61406&action=edit
generated asm file
The generated output.
The first fuction has a shrq. A shift is expected here.
The 2n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120221
--- Comment #4 from Christophe Jaillet
---
The naming I've used is really bad.
function_ok() is where the code looks *NOT* optimal and function_ko() where the
generated code looks better...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120221
--- Comment #3 from Christophe Jaillet
---
Created attachment 61405
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61405&action=edit
Reduced reproducer
With the attached file, I manage to reproduce the behavior.
The #define are the one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120221
Bug ID: 120221
Summary: Missed optimization related to switch handling
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
