Re: profiledbootstrap insn-attrtab.c compile taking forever

2005-07-17 Thread R Hill
R Hill wrote: Richard Guenther wrote: On 7/14/05, Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As subject says - on x86_64 it takes a whopping 30 minutes to compile said with -fprofile-generate! It's caused by -frename-registers enabled by -funroll-loops. Compiling with -O2 -fno-unroll-loops

Re: profiledbootstrap insn-attrtab.c compile taking forever

2005-07-16 Thread R Hill
Richard Guenther wrote: On 7/14/05, Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As subject says - on x86_64 it takes a whopping 30 minutes to compile said with -fprofile-generate! It's caused by -frename-registers enabled by -funroll-loops. Compiling with -O2 -fno-unroll-loops

Re: Some notes on the Wiki

2005-07-10 Thread R Hill
Gerald Pfeifer wrote: As far as reviewing/applying/approving patches for wwwdocs is concerned, and implementing suggestions sent to the GCC lists, I'm committed to do that, and do so within one online day if possible in any way. I'd like to applaud you for that effort. However, I just don't

Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-13)

2005-06-14 Thread R Hill
Daniel Kegel wrote: Scott Robert Ladd wrote: Agreed. I've had mixed reports from folks over in the Gentoo universe about glibc; perhaps this page might be of interest: http://process-of-elimination.net/?q=gentoo_and_gcc_4_0_0_tips_and_tricks Hey Scott. That page is pretty outdated. AFAIK

Re: Tracking down gcc-4.0 performance regressions

2005-06-06 Thread R Hill
René Rebe wrote: I think this massive -Os regressions on C++ code as experienced in tramp3d and botan should be investigated. However I have not looked for filled PRs or more recnt snapshots of 4.0 so far ... Oh good, so it's not just me. ;) I opened PR21314 a while back but ended up

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

2005-05-30 Thread R Hill
Daniel Berlin wrote: On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 16:37 +1200, Ross Smith wrote: On Sunday, 29 May 2005 03:17, Uros Bizjak wrote: Is perhaps some kind of anonymous account needed (as in Slashdot's case) to encourage these users to fill bugreports? I think this is probably the real showstopper.

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla?

2005-05-30 Thread R Hill
Russ Allbery wrote: It's not the request for the e-mail address. It's that it's phrased as a login screen and a button to create an account. I know that I definitely pause and consider before I create an account at a web site. There are many on-line newspapers that I refuse to read articles

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

2005-05-28 Thread R Hill
Joe Buck wrote: It also helps assure that the bug filer is a real person. If Bugzilla provided an anonymous way to file Bugzilla reports, we'd probably have spammers filling the bug database with ads for penis enlargement. RESOLVED: WORKSFORME --de.

Re: GCC 3.3.6 has been released

2005-05-28 Thread R Hill
Gerald Pfeifer wrote: On Fri, 27 May 2005, R Hill wrote: a tiny detail, but i figured i would mention it. congratulations. Thanks, I just installed your patch. Gerald Just curious, are you guys interested in these types of brain dead janitorial patches? I've noticed a few other small

Re: GCC 3.3.6 has been released

2005-05-27 Thread R Hill
Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: The list of changes is available at http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.3/changes.html a tiny detail, but i figured i would mention it. congratulations. --- changes.html.orig 2005-05-27 18:56:02.0 -0600 +++ changes.html2005-05-27

Re: enable __mt_alloc?

2005-05-13 Thread R Hill
Ola Rönnerup wrote: Hi, How do I enable the use of the __mt_alloc-allocator instead of the default one? this patch applies to gcc-4 but i think it will give you an idea where to look. http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/*checkout*/devel/gcc/gcc4-libstdc%2B%2B-mt-alloc.patch

Re: GCC 3.4.4 RC1

2005-05-12 Thread R Hill
Giovanni Bajo wrote: Etienne Lorrain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some of those problem may also exist in GCC-4.0 because this version (and the 4.1 I tested) gives me an increase of 60% of the code size compared to 3.4.3. This is a serious regression which should be submitted in Bugzilla. Would you