https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119495
--- Comment #2 from Richard Sandiford <rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Filip Kastl from comment #0) > So my understanding is that this slowdown isn't really that important. > However, it seemed reasonable to at least notify Richard Sandiford about > this in case he wants to investigate it. Otherwise, I would be fine with > closing this as WONTFIX or something like that. If we did change something, I suppose the question is whether that something would be in the target-independent bits (the hooks, the IRA code, and the general infrastructure) or whether it would be in the x86 costing. I can look at it if it turns out that we need the former, but the latter would be better done by x86 folks.
