From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-124400-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 12446 invoked by alias); 30 Dec 2004 12:15:46 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 12386 invoked by uid 48); 30 Dec 2004 12:15:40 -0000
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 12:15:00 -0000
From: "steven at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Message-ID: <20041230121537.19201.steven@gcc.gnu.org>
Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/19201] New: [m68k] Inefficient code for array accesses  (from old PROBLEMS)
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-SW-Source: 2004-12/txt/msg03933.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

Item 10 from the old PROBLEMS file (no test case available):

----------------------------------------
        movl a3@,a0
        movl a3@(16),a1
        clrb a0@(a1:l)

is generated and may be worse than

        movl a3@,a0
        addl a3@(16),a0
        clrb a0@

If ordering of operands is improved, many more such cases will be
generated from typical array accesses.
----------------------------------------

-- 
           Summary: [m68k] Inefficient code for array accesses  (from old
                    PROBLEMS)
           Product: gcc
           Version: unknown
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Keywords: missed-optimization
          Severity: enhancement
          Priority: P2
         Component: target
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
                CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19201