From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24199 invoked by alias); 2 Sep 2005 08:22:38 -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 23412 invoked by uid 48); 2 Sep 2005 08:21:15 -0000 Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2005 08:22:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20050902082114.23411.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20050815021237.23393.pinskia@gcc.gnu.org> References: <20050815021237.23393.pinskia@gcc.gnu.org> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/23393] [4.1 Regression] catchall-1.m and local-variables-1.m fails at -Os X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2005-09/txt/msg00175.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-02 08:21 ------- Yeah. But if I also back out http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/global.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.130&r2=1.131 we are back to what is seen on HEAD now. The state between that 2005-08-22 checkin and 2005-09-01 checkin was wrong, caused too many registers to be unnecessarily forced into memory and as such drastically changed what subsequent optimizations did. So, unless these failures have been a regression before 2005-08-22, please don't treat them as such. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23393