http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53676
Steven Bosscher <steven at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |steven at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #14 from Steven Bosscher <steven at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-08-22
08:55:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> No, it's only the commit referenced in this PR. No optimization regressions
> warrant a backport as they always come with the risk of regressing something
> worse than performance. Trivial restoring of old behavior might be worth
> backporting but the patch introduces a completely new non-trivial transform
> into a core analysis engine that is shared among many passes.
FWIW, it seems to me that small patches, even non-trivial ones, should be
candidates for back-porting after they've been on the trunk or on a later
release branch for a reasonable period of time. E.g. after 3 months on the GCC
4.8 trunk and with no resulting bugs reported, this patch should be considered
for back-porting IMHO.
