https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66584
--- Comment #7 from Jason McG <jmcguiness at liquidcapital dot com> --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6) > If someone cares so much about the static branch predictor, they would be a ... I am not a compiler developer and I do care about this in the code I work upon. I occasionally have switch statements that I statically know have a more commonly used case label (e.g. could be made the default) that static branch-prediction would reduce the cost of calling. It would have saved me some time if the documentation I was requesting were present in a more accessible form that writing test code & reviewing the assembler that gcc generates. Aside: I have read https://ols.fedoraproject.org/GCC/Reprints-2008/sayle-reprint.pdf and no-where does this article describe, apart from in passing, the effect of mis-predicted branches that using static branch-prediction could avoid by clearly implementing a "preferred branch" e.g. the default upon their cost models. If I had time I'd research this, unfortunately I do not.
