[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

2013-02-05 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

2013-02-05 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 --- Comment #13 from Richard Biener 2013-02-05 15:33:51 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Tue Feb 5 15:33:35 2013 New Revision: 195759 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195759 Log: 2013-02-05 Richard Biener

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

2013-02-05 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #29356|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

2013-02-05 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 --- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres 2013-02-05 13:35:51 UTC --- After an incremental update of r195753 with the patch in comment #10, compiling rnflow.f90 with '-O3 -ffast-math -funroll-loops' gives an executable which segfault.

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

2013-02-05 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #29355|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

2013-02-05 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|mat

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

2013-01-14 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-01-14 16:45:11 UTC --- Can't we then compute the final values of the bases after the peeling loop, and add those gimplified after the peeling loop, then use them in the next loop?

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

2013-01-14 Thread matz at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 --- Comment #7 from Michael Matz 2013-01-14 15:55:51 UTC --- The patch should lead to wrong code at some places (when peeling for alignment actually does something). The problem is, you calculate base and step before peeling and cache tha

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

2013-01-11 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-01-11 11:52:59 UTC --- Created attachment 29144 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29144 hackish attempt

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

2012-12-10 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 --- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de 2012-12-10 12:26:21 UTC --- On Mon, 10 Dec 2012, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 > > Jakub Jelinek changed: > >What

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

2012-12-10 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

2012-11-13 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 --- Comment #3 from Uros Bizjak 2012-11-13 18:46:13 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > Yeah. Is there any progress on this issue?

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

2012-09-07 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

2012-05-14 Thread matz at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 Michael Matz changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |matz at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

2012-05-14 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|