public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug middle-end/23785] [4.1 Regression] 197.parser performance drop
       [not found] <bug-23785-8649@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2005-11-12 15:40 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2005-12-19 18:05 ` [Bug middle-end/23785] [4.1/4.2 " mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-11-12 15:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Priority|P2                          |P3
            Summary|197.parser performance drop |[4.1 Regression] 197.parser
                   |                            |performance drop
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.1.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23785


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* [Bug middle-end/23785] [4.1/4.2 Regression] 197.parser performance drop
       [not found] <bug-23785-8649@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
  2005-11-12 15:40 ` [Bug middle-end/23785] [4.1 Regression] 197.parser performance drop pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-12-19 18:05 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2006-01-17  0:42 ` uttamp at us dot ibm dot com
  2006-02-13 21:32 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-12-19 18:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #5 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-12-19 18:05 -------
I've marked this as P2.  We should try to understand the problem, but inlining
heuristics are notoriously hard to get right, so it's hard to be sure whether
we're seeing a real bug in the compiler, or just a situation where we got lucky
before.


-- 

mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Priority|P3                          |P2


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23785


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* [Bug middle-end/23785] [4.1/4.2 Regression] 197.parser performance drop
       [not found] <bug-23785-8649@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
  2005-11-12 15:40 ` [Bug middle-end/23785] [4.1 Regression] 197.parser performance drop pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2005-12-19 18:05 ` [Bug middle-end/23785] [4.1/4.2 " mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2006-01-17  0:42 ` uttamp at us dot ibm dot com
  2006-02-13 21:32 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: uttamp at us dot ibm dot com @ 2006-01-17  0:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #6 from uttamp at us dot ibm dot com  2006-01-17 00:42 -------
With the latest mainline, the performance numbers for parser benchmark are very
close to the reported numbers (on July 29th 2005). With the mainline, parser
numbers on powerpc64-linux with "-O3
-m32 -mcpu=power4 -ffast-math -fpeel-loops -ftree-loop-linear -funroll-loops"
flags is, 197.parser: 438 (and the reported drop was at 423). 
Looking at the current numbers I don't think I should investigate this any
further. I'm thinking of closing this bug as FIXED.

Any thoughts?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23785


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* [Bug middle-end/23785] [4.1/4.2 Regression] 197.parser performance drop
       [not found] <bug-23785-8649@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2006-01-17  0:42 ` uttamp at us dot ibm dot com
@ 2006-02-13 21:32 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: steven at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2006-02-13 21:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #7 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-02-13 21:32 -------
Reporter says this is fixed, and nobody seems to disagree.


-- 

steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|WAITING                     |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23785


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2006-02-13 21:32 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <bug-23785-8649@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2005-11-12 15:40 ` [Bug middle-end/23785] [4.1 Regression] 197.parser performance drop pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-12-19 18:05 ` [Bug middle-end/23785] [4.1/4.2 " mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-01-17  0:42 ` uttamp at us dot ibm dot com
2006-02-13 21:32 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).