http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|WAITING
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #70 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-08-28 11:28:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #69)
Is there still a problem here?
for current trunk and the original testcase, timings are reasonable at -O0 -O1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #71 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-08-28 14:54:54 UTC ---
The -O3 compile is 3h later still running and needs 20Gb of RAM. The issue
seems now to be variable_tracking_main
#0 0x00b7b8ce in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #66 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-02
15:28:17 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Jul 2 15:28:11 2012
New Revision: 189163
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=189163
Log:
2012-07-02 Martin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #67 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-02
15:44:01 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Jul 2 15:43:56 2012
New Revision: 189164
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=189164
Log:
2012-07-02 Martin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #68 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-02
15:53:29 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Jul 2 15:53:21 2012
New Revision: 189165
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=189165
Log:
2012-07-02 Martin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #65 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-29
14:34:34 UTC ---
I have posted the patch to the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-06/msg01928.html
along with an equivalent one for the 4.6 branch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #61 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-26
14:26:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #57)
I will, on Monday.
And by Monday I obviously meant yesterday ;-)
Anyway, on the machine where are debugged this, compilation
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #62 from Michael Matz matz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-26 14:44:58
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #61)
(In reply to comment #57)
Anyway, on the machine where are debugged this, compilation at -O3
took over 16 seconds which dropped
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #63 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-26
14:58:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #61)
(In reply to comment #57)
I will, on Monday.
And by Monday I obviously meant yesterday ;-)
Anyway, on the machine
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #64 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-26
15:01:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #62)
(In reply to comment #61)
(In reply to comment #57)
Anyway, on the machine where are debugged this, compilation at -O3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #58 from Michael Matz matz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-15 14:56:33
UTC ---
Author: matz
Date: Fri Jun 15 14:56:26 2012
New Revision: 188667
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188667
Log:
PR middle-end/38474
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #59 from Michael Matz matz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-15 15:12:59
UTC ---
There should be no compile performance problems in expand anymore.
The alias stmt walker as used from IPA remains a problem, though.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #60 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-06-15 15:26:20 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #59)
There should be no compile performance problems in expand anymore.
The alias stmt walker as used from IPA
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #53 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-05-29 07:45:36 UTC ---
For the original testcase I have for trunk (gcc version 4.8.0 20120516
(experimental) [trunk revision 187595] (GCC)) very reasonable times
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #54 from Michael Matz matz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-29 12:47:29
UTC ---
Yes, only the expand vars problem is attacked by my patch. The alias walking
seems to come from an IPA analysis via ipa_compute_jump_functions.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #55 from Michael Matz matz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-29 13:08:52
UTC ---
FWIW the node-callees list in yukawa_gn_full has 25076 entries.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mjambor at suse
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #51 from Michael Matz matz at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-12-02 13:23:57
UTC ---
Nope, I don't have more than a couple hacks to try different approaches
as of right now. I should dust them off for next stage1.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.3.6 |---
--- Comment #49 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-23 21:02 ---
Let's change the bug type at least, from a meta bug to a normal bug.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
25 matches
Mail list logo
