Richard Biener writes:
> Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>Richard Biener writes:
>>> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Richard Sandiford
>>> wrote:
In the fold-const.ii testcase, well over half of the mul_internal
>>calls
were for multiplication by 0 (106038 out of 169355). This patch
>>ad
Richard Sandiford wrote:
>Richard Biener writes:
>> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Richard Sandiford
>> wrote:
>>> In the fold-const.ii testcase, well over half of the mul_internal
>calls
>>> were for multiplication by 0 (106038 out of 169355). This patch
>adds
>>> an early-out for that.
>>>
Richard Biener writes:
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>> In the fold-const.ii testcase, well over half of the mul_internal calls
>> were for multiplication by 0 (106038 out of 169355). This patch adds
>> an early-out for that.
>>
>> Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu. OK
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> In the fold-const.ii testcase, well over half of the mul_internal calls
> were for multiplication by 0 (106038 out of 169355). This patch adds
> an early-out for that.
>
> Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu. OK to install?
Ok. Did you check
In the fold-const.ii testcase, well over half of the mul_internal calls
were for multiplication by 0 (106038 out of 169355). This patch adds
an early-out for that.
Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu. OK to install?
Thanks,
Richard
Index: gcc/wide-int.cc
===