Hi! On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 01:47:56PM +0000, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > Would it not make more sense to use the TARGET_ADDRESS_COST hook > to return different costs for immediate offset and register offset addressing, > and ensure IVOpts correctly takes this into account? > > On AArch64 we've defined different costs for immediate offset, register > offset, > register offset with extend, pre-increment and post-increment. > > I don't see why this has been defined to always return 0 on rs6000...
The actual insns are the same cost for us, approximately anyway. Maybe it would help to make this non-zero for reg+reg addressing, thanks for the hint. There must be something else wrong as well though; I don't see how ivopts could come up with what it does currently as the best plan. Segher
