From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2636 invoked by alias); 28 Aug 2006 16:07:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 2596 invoked by uid 48); 28 Aug 2006 16:07:42 -0000 Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 16:07:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060828160742.2595.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug target/28490] [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] ICE in ia64_expand_move, at config/ia64/ia64.c:1088 In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "sje at cup dot hp dot com" 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 X-SW-Source: 2006-08/txt/msg02455.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #16 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2006-08-28 16:07 ------- Yes, I did some performance measurements with SPEC2000. Allowing any (symbol + offset) resulted in slightly slower code overall, allowing no (symbol + offset) resulted in slightly faster code overall. I will be submitting a patch to do this but probably not until next week. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28490