public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/31360] [4.3 Regression] rtl loop invariant is broken
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 17:18:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070326171817.25123.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-31360-6528@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
------- Comment #6 from rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2007-03-26 18:18 -------
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] rtl loop invariant is broken
> > I would agree, if we had RA capable of that (which I am not quite sure
> > whether we do or not, although this seems simple enough), or better,
> > RA doing better job under high register pressure.
>
> Then how do you explain why loop.c pulled this out of the loop but the new rtl
> loop invariant does not? I don't see why we should care about register
> pressure except inside the RA. Every other compiler does it that way, plus
> they work better than GCC.
some citation (on both claims)? Of course, it is straightforward to
remove the register pressure checks from the optimizers, so if you want,
you can experiment with that.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31360
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-26 17:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-26 5:43 [Bug rtl-optimization/31360] New: " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-26 5:48 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/31360] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-26 9:15 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-26 15:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-26 17:01 ` rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz
2007-03-26 17:09 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-26 17:18 ` rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz [this message]
2007-03-26 21:12 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/31360] [4.2/4.3 " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-26 21:14 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-26 21:17 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-26 21:33 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-26 21:36 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-26 21:37 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-26 21:43 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-26 21:44 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-26 22:05 ` rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz
2007-04-15 22:10 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-04-16 16:53 ` rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-04-17 16:42 ` rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-04-17 21:13 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/31360] [4.2 " steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-04-24 21:42 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-04-24 21:44 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-05-05 23:28 ` rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-05-06 10:10 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-05-06 14:35 ` rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-05-06 17:10 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-05-06 17:14 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-05-14 21:26 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-23 10:16 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/31360] [4.2 Regression] RTL loop invariant is not aggressive enough ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-23 10:23 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-23 20:45 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-25 8:06 ` rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-25 11:38 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-07-20 3:52 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-10-09 19:30 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-02 8:18 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-02 8:22 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-03 7:25 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-03 7:28 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-03 7:28 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-12-08 23:47 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-02-12 13:14 ` alexandre dot nunes at gmail dot com
2008-03-03 14:30 ` alexandre dot nunes at gmail dot com
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070326171817.25123.qmail@sourceware.org \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).