https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64193
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64193
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 34229
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34229&action=edit
patch
Ok, I see the regression introduced by that rev., but on trunk (r218479)
I get the same code generated w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64193
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Cederman ---
> Probably the regression was mitigated by the partial fix for PR63677:
Yes, that seems to be the case for my attached example. Do you think that the
regression is mitigated in general, or is your attached
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64193
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 9 Dec 2014, cederman at gaisler dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64193
>
> --- Comment #5 from Daniel Cederman ---
> > Probably the regression was mitigated
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64193
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
AFAICT if there is any speedup with the patch in comment 5, it is negligible on
a 2.8Ghz Corei7 and x86_64-apple-darwin14: ~7.1s with/without the patch. Note
that the timing in the test is not very pre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64193
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 9 Dec 2014, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64193
>
> --- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> AFAICT if there is any speedup with t
