From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27137 invoked by alias); 12 May 2005 10:39:14 -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 27075 invoked by uid 48); 12 May 2005 10:39:06 -0000 Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 10:39:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20050512103906.27074.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "steven at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20050512094159.21529.etienne_lorrain@yahoo.fr> References: <20050512094159.21529.etienne_lorrain@yahoo.fr> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/21529] code size regression (+40%) with -Os from GCC-3.4.3 to 4.1 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg01653.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-12 10:39 ------- Yada yada yada, you know the drill. SRA, out-of-ssa, and register allocation all working against each other: :; D.1605 = DI.IDE_found + (struct IDE_found_str *) ((long unsigned int) i * 8); tmp$reserved = D.1605->reserved; tmp$bios_order = D.1605->bios_order; tmp$irq = D.1605->irq; tmp$ideIOctrladr = D.1605->ideIOctrladr; tmp$ideIOadr = D.1605->ideIOadr; D.1605->reserved = save$reserved; D.1605->bios_order = save$bios_order; D.1605->irq = save$irq; D.1605->ideIOctrladr = save$ideIOctrladr; D.1605->ideIOadr = save$ideIOadr; i = i + 1; save$reserved = tmp$reserved; save$bios_order = tmp$bios_order; save$irq = tmp$irq; save$ideIOctrladr = tmp$ideIOctrladr; save$ideIOadr = tmp$ideIOadr; Wouldn't a block move be more efficient here than moving things one-by-one? -- What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed| |1 Keywords| |ra Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-05-12 10:39:02 date| | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21529