From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-60382-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 32355 invoked by alias); 11 Jun 2003 22:41:43 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 32345 invoked by uid 48); 11 Jun 2003 22:41:43 -0000
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 22:41:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20030611224143.32343.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
From: "pinskia@physics.uc.edu" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
In-Reply-To: <20021002075601.8126.o.lauffenburger@topsolid.com>
References: <20021002075601.8126.o.lauffenburger@topsolid.com>
Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug optimization/8126] [3.3/3.4 regression] Floating point computation far slower in 3.2 than in 2.95
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-SW-Source: 2003-06/txt/msg01398.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8126


pinskia@physics.uc.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|3.4                         |3.3.1


------- Additional Comments From pinskia@physics.uc.edu  2003-06-11 22:41 -------
Does using -fnew-ra get back to 2.95 speed?