https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111153
--- Comment #4 from Robin Dapp <rdapp at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Yes, with VLS reduction this will improve.
On aarch64 + sve I see
loop inside costs: 2
This is similar to our VLS costs.
And their loop is indeed short:
ld1w z30.s, p7/z, [x0, x2, lsl 2]
add x2, x2, x3
add z31.s, p7/m, z31.s, z30.s
whilelo p7.s, w2, w1
b.any .L3
Not much to be squeezed out with a VLS approach. I guess that's why.
