https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109549
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
> BTW, I saw Andrew's patch fixing cmov:
It is unrelated. This is a cost model issue of the x86 backend I think.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109549
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note for some x86 cores having 2 or more cmove back to back is worse than a
conditional jump so maybe the testcase is now catching what it should happen
...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109549
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||testsuite-fail
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109549
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109549
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
x86's tuning does have some support for avoiding multiple cmovs in a single
if-converted sequence. I'll double check if that's kicking in here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109549
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109549
--- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
And just an FYI, the tester is flagging conditional move failures for mips64-*
rx-elf and s390-linux-gnu. Most likely these are additional cases where the
hook is indicating the transformation isn't profit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109549
--- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Note for some x86 cores having 2 or more cmove back to back is worse than a
> conditional jump so maybe the testcase is now catching what it should happen
> ...
P
