[Bug rtl-optimization/70478] [LRA] S/390: Performance regression - superfluous stack frame

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478 --- Comment #11 from Vladimir Makarov --- Author: vmakarov Date: Tue Apr 11 19:39:59 2017 New Revision: 246854 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246854&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2017-04-11 Vladimir Makarov PR rtl-optimization/70478

[Bug rtl-optimization/70478] [LRA] S/390: Performance regression - superfluous stack frame

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478 --- Comment #10 from Vladimir Makarov --- Author: vmakarov Date: Mon Apr 10 14:58:33 2017 New Revision: 246808 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246808&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2017-04-10 Vladimir Makarov PR rtl-optimization/70478

[Bug rtl-optimization/70478] [LRA] S/390: Performance regression - superfluous stack frame

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478 --- Comment #9 from Vladimir Makarov --- Author: vmakarov Date: Sat Apr 8 19:18:42 2017 New Revision: 246789 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246789&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2017-04-08 Vladimir Makarov PR rtl-optimization/70478

[Bug rtl-optimization/70478] [LRA] S/390: Performance regression - superfluous stack frame

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478 --- Comment #8 from Vladimir Makarov --- Author: vmakarov Date: Fri Apr 7 16:01:50 2017 New Revision: 246764 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246764&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2017-04-07 Vladimir Makarov PR rtl-optimization/70478

[Bug rtl-optimization/70478] [LRA] S/390: Performance regression - superfluous stack frame

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478 --- Comment #7 from Vladimir Makarov --- (In reply to Andreas Krebbel from comment #6) > The only solution we found caused other regressions. I'll try to change the sensitive LRA code to solve it. It will need to test a few targets. So, if eve

[Bug rtl-optimization/70478] [LRA] S/390: Performance regression - superfluous stack frame

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478 Andreas Krebbel changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/70478] [LRA] S/390: Performance regression - superfluous stack frame

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478 --- Comment #5 from Andreas Krebbel --- (In reply to Dominik Vogt from comment #4) > Is there any new information on this issue? Adding the ? constraint modifier was an overall loss. So I did not pursue this any further.

[Bug rtl-optimization/70478] [LRA] S/390: Performance regression - superfluous stack frame

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478 Dominik Vogt changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com --- Commen

[Bug rtl-optimization/70478] [LRA] S/390: Performance regression - superfluous stack frame

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478 --- Comment #3 from Andreas Krebbel --- (In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #2) Thanks for having a look. I'll experiment a bit with adding a '?' constraint modifier to see what impact it has on benchmarks. In fact it would match the real

[Bug rtl-optimization/70478] [LRA] S/390: Performance regression - superfluous stack frame

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478 --- Comment #2 from Vladimir Makarov --- The difference I see is that LRA chooses alternative "Q,0,Q" and reload chooses "d,0,R". For the "Q,O,Q" LRA reports: 2 Spill pseudo into memory: reject+=3 alt=11,overall=9,losers=1,r

[Bug rtl-optimization/70478] [LRA] S/390: Performance regression - superfluous stack frame

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ra Status|UNCONFIRMED