http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49263
--- Comment #19 from Oleg Endo <olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-10-28
22:01:47 UTC ---
Another thing I've noticed...
Cases such as:
mov.l r0,@r2 ! LS
mov r13,r0 ! MT
and #7,r0 ! EX
tst r0,r0 ! MT
bt/s .L8 ! BR
mov.l r0,@(16,r1)
where the result of the and op is re-used would be slightly better as:
mov.l r0,@r2 ! LS
mov r13,r0 ! MT
tst #7,r0 ! MT
and #7,r0 ! EX
bt/s .L8 ! BR
mov.l r0,@(16,r1)
because it reduces dependency on the result of the and op and thus has a higher
chance to be executed in parallel.
