From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18670 invoked by alias); 23 Jul 2003 07:02:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 18661 invoked by uid 48); 23 Jul 2003 07:02:16 -0000 Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 07:02:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030723070216.18660.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot 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: 2003-07/txt/msg02683.txt.bz2 List-Id: 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 mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Target Milestone|3.3.1 |3.3.2 ------- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-07-23 07:02 ------- Jan says, via private email, that this is a "random" slowdown. In other words, that regstack makes some decisions that are easily perturbed and that some sometimes it gets luck and sometimes idt doesn't. We should fix that, but not before 3.3.1, so I've postponed this bug until GCC 3.3.2.