http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48688
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-04-20
12:30:10 UTC ---
Actually, I've managed to handle this by adding a new define_insn_and_split
(*lea_general_4).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48688
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48688
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48688
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48688
--- Comment #1 from Piotr Wyderski 2011-04-19
18:00:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> If k is small (on x86/x64 k = 1, 2, 4, 8)
Of course it should be k = 0, 1, 2, 3, the values above are 1 << k.
