[Bug rtl-optimization/21329] optimize i386 block copy

2005-05-02 Thread vda at port dot imtp dot ilyichevsk dot odessa dot ua
--- Additional Comments From vda at port dot imtp dot ilyichevsk dot odessa dot ua 2005-05-02 09:00 --- Created an attachment (id=8790) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8790&action=view) testcase -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21329

[Bug rtl-optimization/21329] optimize i386 block copy

2005-05-02 Thread vda at port dot imtp dot ilyichevsk dot odessa dot ua
--- Additional Comments From vda at port dot imtp dot ilyichevsk dot odessa dot ua 2005-05-02 09:02 --- Created an attachment (id=8791) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8791&action=view) patch against 4.0.0 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21329

[Bug rtl-optimization/21329] optimize i386 block copy

2005-05-02 Thread vda at port dot imtp dot ilyichevsk dot odessa dot ua
--- Additional Comments From vda at port dot imtp dot ilyichevsk dot odessa dot ua 2005-05-02 09:04 --- Comparison between old and new code (-O2): --- tO2.s Mon May 2 11:49:24 2005 +++ tO2-new.s Mon May 2 11:50:03 2005 @@ -35,8 +35,7 @@ movl$t21, %edi movl

[Bug rtl-optimization/21329] optimize i386 block copy

2005-05-02 Thread vda at port dot imtp dot ilyichevsk dot odessa dot ua
--- Additional Comments From vda at port dot imtp dot ilyichevsk dot odessa dot ua 2005-05-02 09:10 --- BTW, see above comment: gcc -O2 allocated 24 bytes on stack and never uset them. ?! Now, unoptimized compilation comparison: --- t.s Mon May 2 11:41:20 2005 +++ t-new.s Mon May