https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94092
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > >For coremark, this is not only harmful to performance, but also code size. > > > Bad, very bad benchmark .... Coremark only handles very very small data sets by default. I think you should run your real code over this and see if it improves or not. Also -O2 does not care exactly about code size, that -Os only. Can you provide a test where besides coremark which decreases in performance and increase in size?
