https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57534
--- Comment #29 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #28) > BTW, ISTM that we need Bin to chime in on the complexity of improving this > in IVOPTS -- ie, is it gcc-8 or gcc-9 material. If the latter, then we > should adjust the target milestone. Yes, it's more like a GCC9 stuff. For the record, I think this could be generalized to cover addressing mode issue revealed by PR84037. That is, not only non-iv addresses, but also addresses after iv_rewrite could be refined for best selection of addressing mode.
