Ian Lance Taylor writes: > Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I suggest that those who think this is a severe problem are the > > ones who are highly motivated to work on a solution. An > > efficient solution could be tricky: you don't want to disrupt > > pipelines, or interfere with optimizations that rely on > > recognizing that there is a modulo. > > I suspect that the best fix, in the sense of generating the best > code, would be to do this at the tree level. That will give loop > and VRP optimizations the best chance to eliminate the test for -1. > Doing it during gimplification would be easy, if perhaps rather > ugly. If there are indeed several processors with this oddity, > then it would even make a certain degree of sense as a > target-independent option.
x86, x86-64, S/390, as far as I'm aware. Andrew.
