PR17103 states that mulli is better than decomposing into shift/add sequence.
Following is example where we are being inconsistent about that decision.
Compiled with gcc -O2 -mcpu=power4 -m32
struct S {
int i1,i2,i3,i4,i5,i6;
}s[10];
int y;
int test1(int j, int x)
{
y = y * 24; // shift/sub
s[j].i1 = 1; // mulli
return (x * 24); // mulli
}
--
Summary: Inconsistent multiply by immediate
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pthaugen at us dot ibm dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: powerpc64-linux
GCC host triplet: powerpc64-linux
GCC target triplet: powerpc64-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22067
