https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91775

--- Comment #7 from Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> 
> probably also a missed-optimization for the new doloop stuff?

Thanks for the information!

This looks a good case with zero doloop_cost_for_address, but the doloop
dedicated IV would also suffer the TYPE_PRECISION issue pointed by Bin.

Reply via email to