https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89774
Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Last reconfirmed| |2019-04-22
CC| |segher at gcc dot gnu.org
See Also| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=90070,
| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=22326
Resolution|INVALID |---
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
We currently only do it for trivial cases, as the example in comment 6 shows
as well. This is done during expand, which is the wrong place for it.
PR90070 is asking for better optimisation of this: do the operation in single
precision, and use single-precision constants, if this does not change the
result (or there is some -ffast-math option).
PR22326 is also closely related. I don't think we can close any of these PRs
as a dup of another, they are all asking for slightly different things :-)
