* [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] code size regression from 4.0 on x86
2005-07-30 23:13 [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] New: code size regression from 4.0 on x86 dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
@ 2005-07-31 0:12 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-01 14:51 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] [4.1 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-07-31 0:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-30 23:13 -------
This could be many things, first we don't care about code size for -O2.
Second this is most likely jump threading.
Can you add -ftree-dominator-opts and see what the code size problems are?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23153
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] [4.1 Regression] code size regression from 4.0 on x86
2005-07-30 23:13 [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] New: code size regression from 4.0 on x86 dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
2005-07-31 0:12 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-08-01 14:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-01 14:51 ` [Bug tree-optimization/23153] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-08-01 14:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |missed-optimization
Summary|code size regression from |[4.1 Regression] code size
|4.0 on x86 |regression from 4.0 on x86
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23153
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/23153] [4.1 Regression] code size regression from 4.0 on x86
2005-07-30 23:13 [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] New: code size regression from 4.0 on x86 dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
2005-07-31 0:12 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-01 14:51 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] [4.1 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-08-01 14:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-01 18:51 ` dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
` (10 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-08-01 14:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component|rtl-optimization |tree-optimization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23153
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/23153] [4.1 Regression] code size regression from 4.0 on x86
2005-07-30 23:13 [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] New: code size regression from 4.0 on x86 dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2005-08-01 14:51 ` [Bug tree-optimization/23153] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-08-01 18:51 ` dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
2005-08-01 18:57 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu @ 2005-08-01 18:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu 2005-08-01 18:51 -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> This could be many things, first we don't care about code size for -O2.
>
> Second this is most likely jump threading.
>
> Can you add -ftree-dominator-opts and see what the code size problems are?
I am not sure what you are asking. Aren't tree-dominator-opts enabled by default
at -O2?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23153
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/23153] [4.1 Regression] code size regression from 4.0 on x86
2005-07-30 23:13 [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] New: code size regression from 4.0 on x86 dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2005-08-01 18:51 ` dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
@ 2005-08-01 18:57 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-01 20:43 ` dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
` (8 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-08-01 18:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-01 18:57 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> I am not sure what you are asking. Aren't tree-dominator-opts enabled by default
> at -O2?
I had meant -fno-tree-dominator-opts.
See PR 21883 for an example where DOM causes a code size increase.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
BugsThisDependsOn| |21883
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23153
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/23153] [4.1 Regression] code size regression from 4.0 on x86
2005-07-30 23:13 [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] New: code size regression from 4.0 on x86 dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2005-08-01 18:57 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-08-01 20:43 ` dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
2005-08-08 21:53 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu @ 2005-08-01 20:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu 2005-08-01 20:43 -------
-fno-tree-dominator-opts does not seem to have a great influence.
text data bss dec hex filename
181547 14052 6684 202283 3162b 4.1-nodopts-O2-i386/xterm
195088 14056 6684 215828 34b14 4.1-nodopts-O2-i686/xterm
156043 14052 6684 176779 2b28b 4.1-nodopts-Os-i386/xterm
156459 14052 6684 177195 2b42b 4.1-nodopts-Os-i686/xterm
175627 21724 6684 204035 31d03 4.0-nodopts-O2-i386/xterm
189704 21728 6684 218116 35404 4.0-nodopts-O2-i686/xterm
150191 21724 6684 178599 2b9a7 4.0-nodopts-Os-i386/xterm
150567 21724 6684 178975 2bb1f 4.0-nodopts-Os-i686/xterm
Looking over a few files it does not look like there's a big difference
between the tree dumps for 4.1 and 4.0 (the .vars dumps), so I would guess the
some change at the rtl level is responsible for the size increase.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23153
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/23153] [4.1 Regression] code size regression from 4.0 on x86
2005-07-30 23:13 [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] New: code size regression from 4.0 on x86 dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2005-08-01 20:43 ` dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
@ 2005-08-08 21:53 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-10 0:14 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-08-08 21:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
BugsThisDependsOn| |23289
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23153
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/23153] [4.1 Regression] code size regression from 4.0 on x86
2005-07-30 23:13 [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] New: code size regression from 4.0 on x86 dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2005-08-08 21:53 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-08-10 0:14 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-10 0:15 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-08-10 0:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
BugsThisDependsOn| |23302
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23153
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/23153] [4.1 Regression] code size regression from 4.0 on x86
2005-07-30 23:13 [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] New: code size regression from 4.0 on x86 dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2005-08-10 0:14 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-08-10 0:15 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-11 9:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-08-10 0:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
BugsThisDependsOn| |23303
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23153
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/23153] [4.1 Regression] code size regression from 4.0 on x86
2005-07-30 23:13 [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] New: code size regression from 4.0 on x86 dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2005-08-10 0:15 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-08-11 9:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-19 21:50 ` dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
` (3 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-08-11 9:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
Bug 23153 depends on bug 23289, which changed state.
Bug 23289 Summary: [4.1 Regression] tail call optimization not performed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23289
What |Old Value |New Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23153
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/23153] [4.1 Regression] code size regression from 4.0 on x86
2005-07-30 23:13 [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] New: code size regression from 4.0 on x86 dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2005-08-11 9:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-08-19 21:50 ` dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
2005-08-19 21:54 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu @ 2005-08-19 21:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu 2005-08-19 21:47 -------
Is there any reason that this PR is still in "UNCONFIRMED" state?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23153
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/23153] [4.1 Regression] code size regression from 4.0 on x86
2005-07-30 23:13 [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] New: code size regression from 4.0 on x86 dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2005-08-19 21:50 ` dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
@ 2005-08-19 21:54 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-19 22:06 ` [Bug target/23153] [4.1 Regression] [meta-bug] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-13 23:09 ` dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-08-19 21:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
BugsThisDependsOn| |23488
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23153
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/23153] [4.1 Regression] [meta-bug] code size regression from 4.0 on x86
2005-07-30 23:13 [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] New: code size regression from 4.0 on x86 dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2005-08-19 21:54 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-08-19 22:06 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-13 23:09 ` dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-08-19 22:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19 21:54 -------
(In reply to comment #5)
> Is there any reason that this PR is still in "UNCONFIRMED" state?
Because this really a meta-bug now.
And it looks like all the remaining issues are caused by:
2005-07-30 Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz>
* expr.c (expand_expr_real_1): Do not load mem targets into register.
* i386.c (ix86_fixup_binary_operands): Likewise.
(ix86_expand_unary_operator): Likewise.
(ix86_expand_fp_absneg_operator): Likewise.
* optabs.c (expand_vec_cond_expr): Validate dest.
So this is target issue.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
BugsThisDependsOn|21883 |
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Component|tree-optimization |target
Ever Confirmed| |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-08-19 21:54:52
date| |
Summary|[4.1 Regression] code size |[4.1 Regression] [meta-bug]
|regression from 4.0 on x86 |code size regression from
| |4.0 on x86
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23153
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/23153] [4.1 Regression] [meta-bug] code size regression from 4.0 on x86
2005-07-30 23:13 [Bug rtl-optimization/23153] New: code size regression from 4.0 on x86 dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2005-08-19 22:06 ` [Bug target/23153] [4.1 Regression] [meta-bug] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-09-13 23:09 ` dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu @ 2005-09-13 23:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu 2005-09-13 23:09 -------
Additional data:
For the testcase in PR8361:
size -f generate-3.4*.o
text data bss dec hex filename
297025 4 181 297210 488fa generate-3.4-4.0.o
318366 8 181 318555 4dc5b generate-3.4-4.1.o
so about a 7% increase for 4.1
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23153
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread