http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18589
William J. Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18589
--- Comment #9 from William J. Schmidt 2012-04-12
16:15:24 UTC ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Thu Apr 12 16:15:13 2012
New Revision: 186384
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=186384
Log:
gcc:
2012-04-12 Bill Schmidt
PR tr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18589
William J. Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassign
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18589
--- Comment #7 from William J. Schmidt 2012-01-09
13:06:34 UTC ---
Sure, I'll at least have a look at it when I get some time.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18589
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18589
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2005-12-21 03:49:53 |2012-01-04
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pin
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-05 17:43 ---
In 4.2.0 and above we get:
baz:
.LFB2:
mulsd %xmm1, %xmm0
mulsd %xmm0, %xmm0
mulsd %xmm0, %xmm0
ret
Which is what I recommend but we don't get that on the tree level:
return b
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-05
19:37 ---
I think PR 22312 mentions what the current problem with reassoc is (well once I
submit the patch to
introduce reassociation for fp).
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-12
06:50 ---
This is actually not a target issue, it can be shown on ppc also and other
targets including x86.
doing (f1*f2)^2^2 will be the best every where as it is only three instructions
and it would take the
same
