https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
Mel Chen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bina2374 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #27 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #26 from Christophe Lyon ---
Author: clyon
Date: Mon May 27 13:37:57 2019
New Revision: 271662
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271662&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[testsuite,aarch64,arm] PR88440: Fix testcases
2019-05-27 Christophe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #25 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri May 24 08:48:14 2019
New Revision: 271595
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271595&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-05-23 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/88440
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu May 23 11:35:16 2019
New Revision: 271553
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271553&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-05-23 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/88440
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #22 from Richard Biener ---
The code in question was originally added with r202721 by Vlad and likely
became more costly after making the target macro a hook (no inlining
anymore).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #21 from Richard Biener ---
Ick.
static inline void
check_pseudos_live_through_calls (int regno,
HARD_REG_SET last_call_used_reg_set,
rtx_insn *call_insn)
{
...
fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #19 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 22 May 2019, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
>
> Martin Liška changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|marxin at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #16 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 46393
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46393&action=edit
SPEC2006 and SPEC2017 report
The report presents difference between master (first gray column) and the
Richi's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #15 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 17 May 2019, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
>
> --- Comment #14 from Martin Liška ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #14 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #13)
> On Fri, 17 May 2019, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
> >
> > --- Comment #12 from Martin Liška -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 17 May 2019, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
>
> --- Comment #12 from Martin Liška ---
> >
> > Can you share -fopt-report-loop dif
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #12 from Martin Liška ---
>
> Can you share -fopt-report-loop differences? From the above I would
> guess we split a lot of loops, meaning the memcpy/memmove/memset
> calls are in the "middle" and we have to split loops (how many
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 17 May 2019, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
>
> --- Comment #10 from Martin Liška ---
> > So the only significant offender is modu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #10 from Martin Liška ---
> So the only significant offender is module_configure.fppized.f90 file. Let
> me profile it.
Time profile before/after:
╔══╤╤╤═╗
║ PASS │
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
So comparison all files in wrf, I've got:
╔═╤╤╤═╗
║ Filename│ Before │ After │ Change ║
╠═
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 16 May 2019, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
>
> --- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> Created attachment 45313 [details]
> patch
>
> This enables distribution of patterns at -O[2s]+ and optimizes the testcase
> at -Os by adjusting the guards in lo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 45313
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45313&action=edit
patch
This enables distribution of patterns at -O[2s]+ and optimizes the testcase
at -Os by adjusting the guar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 12 Dec 2018, hoganmeier at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
>
> --- Comment #3 from krux ---
> Adding -ftree-loop-distribute-patterns to -Os does
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #3 from krux ---
Adding -ftree-loop-distribute-patterns to -Os does not seem to make a
difference though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I thought I had a dup of this bug somewhere which was asking for this
optimization to moved to -O2 (and -Os) and above rather than keep it at -O3 and
above.
28 matches
Mail list logo
