public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
@ 2007-09-30 21:13 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2007-09-30 21:15 ` [Bug c++/33604] " michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (51 more replies)
0 siblings, 52 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net @ 2007-09-30 21:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
In a C++ template library (a matrix library with expression templates)
upgrading from g++-4.2 to g++-4.3 results in 3x slower programs.
Compiler versions:
g++-4.2 (GCC) 4.2.1 (Debian 4.2.1-5)
g++-4.3 (Debian 4.3-20070902-1) 4.3.0 20070902 (experimental) [trunk revision
128028]
$ g++-4.2 -O3 -DNDEBUG benchmark.cpp -o benchmark && time ./benchmark
1.0001 0 0
0 1.0001 0
0 0 1.0001
real 0m4.495s
user 0m4.416s
sys 0m0.003s
$ g++-4.3 -O3 -DNDEBUG benchmark.cpp -o benchmark && time ./benchmark
1.0001 0 0
0 1.0001 0
0 0 1.0001
real 0m15.891s
user 0m15.595s
sys 0m0.018s
I looked at the assembler code but I didn't see anything obvious (I don't
know much about assembler so I may have missed something.
I did notice that adding -fforce-addr changes the result for 4.3 but not
for 4.2.
$ g++-4.3 -O3 -DNDEBUG benchmark.cpp -fforce-addr -o benchmark && time
./benchmark
1.0001 0 0
0 1.0001 0
0 0 1.0001
real 0m8.779s
user 0m8.662s
sys 0m0.007s
--
Summary: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
GCC build triplet: i486-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i486-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i486-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/33604] significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
@ 2007-09-30 21:15 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2007-10-01 9:47 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (50 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net @ 2007-09-30 21:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #1 from michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net 2007-09-30 21:15 -------
Created an attachment (id=14273)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14273&action=view)
The archive allowing to reproduce the bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/33604] significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2007-09-30 21:15 ` [Bug c++/33604] " michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
@ 2007-10-01 9:47 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-10-01 21:03 ` [Bug c++/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes " hjl at lucon dot org
` (49 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-10-01 9:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-01 09:46 -------
With a more recent 4.3 version I get
4.2 4.3
-O2 6.1s 5.1s
-O3 4.1s 5.1s
both -O3 variants have one function not inlined in the main loop. For 4.2
it is
EiEval<EiMatrixProduct<EiMatrix<double, 3, 3>, EiMatrix<double, 3, 3> > >
operator*<double, EiMatrix<double, 3, 3>, EiMatrix<double, 3, 3>
>(EiObject<double, EiMatrix<double, 3, 3> > const&, EiObject<double,
EiMatrix<double, 3, 3> > const&)
for 4.3 it is
EiMatrix<double, 3, 3>& EiObject<double, EiMatrix<double, 3, 3>
>::operator=<EiSum<EiMatrix<double, 3, 3>,
EiScalarProduct<EiSum<EiMatrix<double, 3, 3>, EiMatrix<double, 3, 3> > > >
>(EiObject<double, EiSum<EiMatrix<double, 3, 3>,
EiScalarProduct<EiSum<EiMatrix<double, 3, 3>, EiMatrix<double, 3, 3> > > > >
const&)
but even complete inlining does not improve numbers much. There's also
nothing obvious in the asm - we simply have too little registers and load/store
from/to memory very often.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2007-09-30 21:15 ` [Bug c++/33604] " michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2007-10-01 9:47 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-10-01 21:03 ` hjl at lucon dot org
2007-10-01 21:04 ` hjl at lucon dot org
` (48 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: hjl at lucon dot org @ 2007-10-01 21:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #3 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-10-01 21:03 -------
I have verified that revision 119502:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2006-12/msg00119.html
is the cause.
--
hjl at lucon dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot
| |org
GCC build triplet|i486-linux-gnu |
GCC host triplet|i486-linux-gnu |
GCC target triplet|i486-linux-gnu |
Summary|significantly slower results|[4.3 Regression] Revision
|with 4.3 compared to 4.2 |119502 causes significantly
| |slower results with 4.3
| |compared to 4.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2007-10-01 21:03 ` [Bug c++/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes " hjl at lucon dot org
@ 2007-10-01 21:04 ` hjl at lucon dot org
2007-10-01 21:07 ` Daniel Berlin
2007-10-01 21:07 ` dberlin at dberlin dot org
` (47 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 1 reply; 54+ messages in thread
From: hjl at lucon dot org @ 2007-10-01 21:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #4 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-10-01 21:04 -------
I saw 40% performance regression at -O3 with testcase in comment #1 on
Linux/x86-64.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2007-10-01 21:04 ` hjl at lucon dot org
@ 2007-10-01 21:07 ` dberlin at dberlin dot org
2007-10-22 8:33 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (46 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: dberlin at dberlin dot org @ 2007-10-01 21:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #5 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-01 21:07 -------
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower
results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
I'm not fixing this until someone can tell me what exactly is going
wrong. There have been *so* many changes to PTA since that revision
that the majority of the code it touched doesn't even do the same
thing anymore.
My guess is that this is a case where adding extra vdefs/vuses made
some dumb optimizer able to see something it can't when the chains are
separate like they should be.
On 1 Oct 2007 21:04:40 -0000, hjl at lucon dot org
<gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
>
> ------- Comment #4 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-10-01 21:04 -------
> I saw 40% performance regression at -O3 with testcase in comment #1 on
> Linux/x86-64.
>
>
> --
>
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
>
>
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug c++/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-10-01 21:04 ` hjl at lucon dot org
@ 2007-10-01 21:07 ` Daniel Berlin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Berlin @ 2007-10-01 21:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugzilla; +Cc: gcc-bugs
I'm not fixing this until someone can tell me what exactly is going
wrong. There have been *so* many changes to PTA since that revision
that the majority of the code it touched doesn't even do the same
thing anymore.
My guess is that this is a case where adding extra vdefs/vuses made
some dumb optimizer able to see something it can't when the chains are
separate like they should be.
On 1 Oct 2007 21:04:40 -0000, hjl at lucon dot org
<gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
>
> ------- Comment #4 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-10-01 21:04 -------
> I saw 40% performance regression at -O3 with testcase in comment #1 on
> Linux/x86-64.
>
>
> --
>
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2007-10-01 21:07 ` dberlin at dberlin dot org
@ 2007-10-22 8:33 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-05 1:47 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (45 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-10-22 8:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-22 08:32 -------
Anyone wants to rerun the results?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
| |org
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2007-10-22 8:33 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-05 1:47 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-06 17:10 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
` (44 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-11-05 1:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-05 1:47 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-06 17:10 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-06 18:55 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (43 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gnu dot org @ 2007-11-06 17:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #7 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2007-11-06 17:10 -------
I would also like to know the status, because I would like to get rid of
-fforce-addr. :-)
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |bonzini at gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-06 17:10 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-06 18:55 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2007-11-06 20:08 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
` (42 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net @ 2007-11-06 18:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #8 from michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net 2007-11-06 18:55 -------
A rerun with Debian's latest versions:
g++-4.2 (GCC) 4.2.3 20071014 (prerelease) (Debian 4.2.2-3)
g++-4.3 (Debian 4.3-20071020-1) 4.3.0 20071020 (experimental) [trunk revision
129510]
4.2 4.3 |
---------------
21.2s 19.4s |-O2
4.4s 15.9s |-O3
4.4s 8.5s |-O3 -fforce-addr
This is more or less the same as my original results, but very different from
Richard Guenther's results. Very strange.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-06 18:55 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
@ 2007-11-06 20:08 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-06 21:01 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (41 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gnu dot org @ 2007-11-06 20:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #9 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2007-11-06 20:08 -------
Can you try -O3 -fno-predictive-commoning and -O3 -fno-tree-vectorize?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-06 20:08 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-06 21:01 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2007-11-06 21:23 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
` (40 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net @ 2007-11-06 21:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #10 from michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net 2007-11-06 21:01 -------
4.2 4.3 |
---------------
4.4s 15.9s |-O3
4.6s 16.3s |-O3 -fno-tree-vectorize
X 18.9s |-O3 -fno-predictive-commoning
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-06 21:01 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
@ 2007-11-06 21:23 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-06 21:51 ` [Bug tree-optimization/33604] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (39 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gnu dot org @ 2007-11-06 21:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #11 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2007-11-06 21:23 -------
michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net wrote:
> ------- Comment #10 from michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net 2007-11-06 21:01 -------
> 4.2 4.3 |
> ---------------
> 4.4s 15.9s |-O3
> 4.6s 16.3s |-O3 -fno-tree-vectorize
> X 18.9s |-O3 -fno-predictive-commoning
This is *good* news. :-) New optimizations in GCC 4.3 save 15% of the runtime.
It is then only an aliasing problem, maybe due to extra vdefs/vuses. I
haven't look at the code but, anyway, Danny/Diego---would a patch like this
make sense?
/* Since we clearly cannot lower the number of virtual operators
below the total number of memory statements in the function, we
may need to adjust MAX_ALIASED_VOPS beforehand. */
- if (MAX_ALIASED_VOPS < mem_ref_stats->num_mem_stmts)
- MAX_ALIASED_VOPS = mem_ref_stats->num_mem_stmts;
+ if (MAX_ALIASED_VOPS < mem_ref_stats->num_mem_stmts * AVG_ALIASED_VOPS)
+ MAX_ALIASED_VOPS = mem_ref_stats->num_mem_stmts * AVG_ALIASED_VOPS;
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot
| |org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-06 21:23 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-06 21:51 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-07 6:03 ` paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch
` (38 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-11-06 21:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-06 21:51 -------
I don't think we want to start playing with the heuristics ;) That patch
certainly will cause compile-time and memory usage regressions.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-06 21:51 ` [Bug tree-optimization/33604] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-07 6:03 ` paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch
2007-11-07 12:14 ` dnovillo at google dot com
` (37 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch @ 2007-11-07 6:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #13 from paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch 2007-11-07 06:03 -------
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502
causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
> I don't think we want to start playing with the heuristics ;) That patch
> certainly will cause compile-time and memory usage regressions.
Not for -O2, since the default AVG_ALIASED_VOPS is 1. For -O3 it is 3,
not huge either.
Paolo
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-07 6:03 ` paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch
@ 2007-11-07 12:14 ` dnovillo at google dot com
2007-11-07 13:09 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
` (36 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: dnovillo at google dot com @ 2007-11-07 12:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #14 from dnovillo at google dot com 2007-11-07 12:14 -------
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower
results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
On 7 Nov 2007 06:03:09 -0000, paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch
<gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> > I don't think we want to start playing with the heuristics ;) That patch
> > certainly will cause compile-time and memory usage regressions.
>
> Not for -O2, since the default AVG_ALIASED_VOPS is 1. For -O3 it is 3,
> not huge either.
You'd be surprised. AVG_ALIASED_VOPS is fairly sensitive wrt
compile-time effects. You need to test the effects of this change
carefully.
Diego.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-07 12:14 ` dnovillo at google dot com
@ 2007-11-07 13:09 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-07 13:10 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
` (35 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gnu dot org @ 2007-11-07 13:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #15 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2007-11-07 13:09 -------
Created an attachment (id=14496)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14496&action=view)
self contained testcase
4.2 4.3
-O2 14.5s 11.4s
-O3 4.0s 8.7s
-O2 -finline-functions 4.0s 9.6s
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment #14273|0 |1
is obsolete| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (15 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-07 13:09 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-07 13:10 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-07 14:22 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
` (34 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gnu dot org @ 2007-11-07 13:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2007-11-07 13:09:53
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (16 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-07 13:10 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-07 14:22 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-07 16:03 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
` (33 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gnu dot org @ 2007-11-07 14:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #16 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2007-11-07 14:22 -------
4.3 does much less SRA.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (17 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-07 14:22 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-07 16:03 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-07 16:26 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
` (32 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gnu dot org @ 2007-11-07 16:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #17 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2007-11-07 16:03 -------
Created an attachment (id=14497)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14497&action=view)
"minimal" testcase
This is as small as I could get it (130 lines). Can be made smaller, but the
performance difference is much less sensitive. I get 0.8s with 4.2, 1.4s with
4.3.
The problem is that the MatRef classes (called EiMatrixConstRef in the
original, I renamed stuff and detemplatized it to simplify dumps) are not
scalarized.
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment #14496|0 |1
is obsolete| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (18 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-07 16:03 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-07 16:26 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-07 16:36 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
` (31 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gnu dot org @ 2007-11-07 16:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #18 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2007-11-07 16:26 -------
Created an attachment (id=14498)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14498&action=view)
never say minimal!
So this is a testcase constructed from scratch. 4.3 is 4.5x slower (0.8s vs.
0.18s). Furthermore, if you "#define const", the performance pitfall goes
away.
For whoever wants to work on this, I would double check with the previous
minimal testcase, but this has the same symptoms (no SRA of the Ref instances)
and is much much smaller, so it is more suited to go in GCC's testsuite.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (19 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-07 16:26 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-07 16:36 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-07 17:28 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (30 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gnu dot org @ 2007-11-07 16:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #19 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2007-11-07 16:35 -------
Might be tree-level forwprop, CCing richi...
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
| |org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (20 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-07 16:36 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-07 17:28 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-07 20:59 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
` (29 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-11-07 17:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #20 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-07 17:28 -------
Basically things like
D.2196_13 = (struct Ref *) &D.2150.lhs;
D.2196_13->m ={v} &I;
where D.2150.lhs is const and thus there is a (not useless) cast from
(const struct Ref *) to (struct Ref *). So what the code does is to
store to "const" qualified memory:
D.2150.lhs.m = &I;
of course only as part of constructing it, so it is legal, but the middle-end
cannot tell apart legal from illegal cases.
So we can just declare all of them legal based on the fact that otherwise
this would certainly invoke undefined behavior. In which case tree-level
forwprop can be teached to disregard conversions that change constness
only on address-forwarding.
Something like a more careful
Index: tree-ssa-forwprop.c
===================================================================
--- tree-ssa-forwprop.c (revision 129897)
+++ tree-ssa-forwprop.c (working copy)
@@ -952,8 +952,14 @@ tree_ssa_forward_propagate_single_use_va
continue;
}
- if (TREE_CODE (rhs) == ADDR_EXPR)
+ if (TREE_CODE (rhs) == ADDR_EXPR
+ || ((TREE_CODE (rhs) == NOP_EXPR
+ || TREE_CODE (rhs) == CONVERT_EXPR)
+ && TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (rhs, 0)) == ADDR_EXPR
+ && (TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (TREE_TYPE (TREE_TYPE (rhs)))
+ == TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (TREE_TYPE (TREE_TYPE
(TREE_OPERAND (rhs, 0)))))))
{
+ STRIP_NOPS (rhs);
if (forward_propagate_addr_expr (lhs, rhs))
{
release_defs (stmt);
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2007-11-07 13:09:53 |2007-11-07 17:28:11
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (21 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-07 17:28 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-07 20:59 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
2007-11-08 6:12 ` paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch
` (28 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr @ 2007-11-07 20:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #21 from jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr 2007-11-07 20:58 -------
Hi, I'm the guy behind Eigen, from which the initial testcase is taken.
Would it help the compiler if I removed most of the "const" keywords in my
code?
I am asking because of the following. As Eigen has Lvalue expression
templates(*), it is very cumbersome to enforce constness as many methods have
to be written twice, once const-qualified and once not. Therefore I have given
up enforcing constness, and am doing const_cast's at several places. Therefore
many of the "const" keywords in Eigen are rather meaningless and could be
removed.
(*) for instance the following is allowed:
matrix.row(i) += a * matrix.row(j).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (22 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-07 20:59 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
@ 2007-11-08 6:12 ` paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch
2007-11-09 12:32 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (27 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch @ 2007-11-08 6:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #22 from paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch 2007-11-08 06:12 -------
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502
causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr wrote:
> ------- Comment #21 from jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr 2007-11-07 20:58 -------
> Hi, I'm the guy behind Eigen, from which the initial testcase is taken.
>
> Would it help the compiler if I removed most of the "const" keywords in my
> code?
I'm not the expert on expression templates, but I don't think so.
"const"'s are mostly ignored by the compiler for optimization purposes,
but removing those would be bad for the users, I think.
Paolo
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (23 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-08 6:12 ` paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch
@ 2007-11-09 12:32 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-09 12:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (26 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-11-09 12:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #23 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-09 12:32 -------
Subject: Bug 33604
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 9 12:32:20 2007
New Revision: 130040
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=130040
Log:
2007-11-09 Richard Guenther <rguenther@suse.de>
PR tree-optimization/33604
* tree-ssa-forwprop.c (tree_ssa_forward_propagate_single_use_vars):
Disregard changes in CV qualifiers of pointed to types for
forward propagating ADDR_EXPRs.
* tree-ssa-ccp.c (fold_stmt_r): Preserve volatileness of the original
expression.
* g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr33604.C: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/pr32721.c: Adjust pattern.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr33604.C
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr32721.c
trunk/gcc/tree-ssa-ccp.c
trunk/gcc/tree-ssa-forwprop.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (24 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-09 12:32 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-09 12:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-09 12:49 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
` (25 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-11-09 12:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #24 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-09 12:33 -------
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (25 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-09 12:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-09 12:49 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
2007-11-09 12:52 ` rguenther at suse dot de
` (24 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr @ 2007-11-09 12:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #25 from jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr 2007-11-09 12:49 -------
Huge thanks to Richard Guenther for the fix!
I don't have a 4.3 installed here but I trust you if you say it's fixed :)
Also thanks to everybody who helped, especially to Paolo Bonzini for the
minimal testcase!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (26 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-09 12:49 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
@ 2007-11-09 12:52 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2007-11-09 12:56 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
` (23 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: rguenther at suse dot de @ 2007-11-09 12:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #26 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-11-09 12:51 -------
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502
causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
On Fri, 9 Nov 2007, jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr wrote:
> Huge thanks to Richard Guenther for the fix!
>
> I don't have a 4.3 installed here but I trust you if you say it's fixed :)
>
> Also thanks to everybody who helped, especially to Paolo Bonzini for the
> minimal testcase!
Note that I only looked at the generated assembler ;) You still might
want to check performance at some point.
Richard.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (27 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-09 12:52 ` rguenther at suse dot de
@ 2007-11-09 12:56 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
2007-12-04 10:56 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (22 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr @ 2007-11-09 12:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #27 from jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr 2007-11-09 12:55 -------
OK, I'm using ubuntu and there's no 4.3 package, and last time I tried
compiling a snapshot it failed. I hope someone else will be able to run the
benchmark and post the result.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (28 preceding siblings ...)
2007-11-09 12:56 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
@ 2007-12-04 10:56 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2007-12-04 11:18 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
` (21 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net @ 2007-12-04 10:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #28 from michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net 2007-12-04 10:56 -------
With the latest debian packages:
g++-4.2 (GCC) 4.2.3 20071123 (prerelease) (Debian 4.2.2-4)
g++-4.3 (Debian 4.3-20071130-1) 4.3.0 20071130 (experimental) [trunk revision
130545]
Same speed for benchmark.cpp but _not_ for the original gcc-bug-report.tar.gz:
g++-4.3 is a bit faster than when I first tested (0m14.248s vs. 0m15.891s) but
nowhere near g++-4.2 (0m4.495s).
--
michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (29 preceding siblings ...)
2007-12-04 10:56 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
@ 2007-12-04 11:18 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-12-04 11:21 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (20 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gnu dot org @ 2007-12-04 11:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #29 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2007-12-04 11:17 -------
Could you try 4.2 vs. 4.3 on:
- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14496
- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14497
- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14497 with the first #if 0
enabled
Thanks!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (30 preceding siblings ...)
2007-12-04 11:18 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2007-12-04 11:21 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-12-04 12:17 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (19 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-12-04 11:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #30 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-04 11:21 -------
It is likely that for the bigger testcases we run into our usual
alias-partitioning problems, so also try with --param max-aliased-vops=100000.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (31 preceding siblings ...)
2007-12-04 11:21 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-12-04 12:17 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2007-12-04 12:38 ` paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch
` (18 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net @ 2007-12-04 12:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #31 from michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net 2007-12-04 12:17 -------
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502
causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 11:17:46AM -0000, bonzini at gnu dot org wrote:
> - http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14496
same as gcc-bug-report.tar.gz
> - http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14497
> - http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14497 with the first #if 0 enabled
The difference between 4.2 and 4.3 is not as big but is still there:
0.7s vs. 1.6s
No significant change with "--param max-aliased-vops=100000".
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (32 preceding siblings ...)
2007-12-04 12:17 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
@ 2007-12-04 12:38 ` paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch
2008-01-02 11:17 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (17 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch @ 2007-12-04 12:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #32 from paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch 2007-12-04 12:38 -------
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502
causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
> The difference between 4.2 and 4.3 is not as big but is still there:
> 0.7s vs. 1.6s
Well, that's more than 2x. So, we could say that the penultimate
testcase is good enough.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (33 preceding siblings ...)
2007-12-04 12:38 ` paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch
@ 2008-01-02 11:17 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-02-27 16:36 ` [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 " jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
` (16 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-01-02 11:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #33 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-02 11:00 -------
Unassigning.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
|org |dot org
Status|REOPENED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (34 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-02 11:17 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-02-27 16:36 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
2008-02-27 16:44 ` [Bug target/33604] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (15 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr @ 2008-02-27 16:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #34 from jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr 2008-02-27 16:36 -------
I retried today with
g++-4.3 (Ubuntu 4.3-20080126-1ubuntu1) 4.3.0 20080126 (experimental) [trunk
revision 131874]
and my benchmark ran in 25s compared to 20s with g++-4.2.3.
So there is certainly a lot of improvement though it's still 20% slower than
4.2.3. (This might have further improved since my 4.3 snapshot is 1 month old).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (35 preceding siblings ...)
2008-02-27 16:36 ` [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 " jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
@ 2008-02-27 16:44 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-02-27 16:59 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
` (14 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-02-27 16:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #35 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-27 16:43 -------
We get:
<bb 3>:
m__valuem_I_lsm.28 = 1.0e+0 - m__valuem_I_lsm.28;
ivtmp.30 = ivtmp.30 + 1;
if (ivtmp.30 != 100000000)
goto <bb 3>;
else
goto <bb 4>;
or:
L2:
addl $1, %eax
movapd %xmm1, %xmm2
subsd %xmm0, %xmm2
cmpl $100000000, %eax
movapd %xmm2, %xmm0
jne L2
or :
L2:
addl $1, %eax
cmpl $100000000, %eax
fsub %st, %st(1)
jne L2
All are fast.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component|tree-optimization |target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (36 preceding siblings ...)
2008-02-27 16:44 ` [Bug target/33604] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-02-27 16:59 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
2008-02-27 17:06 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
` (13 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr @ 2008-02-27 16:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #36 from jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr 2008-02-27 16:58 -------
That's great; from the assembly code I take it that you are referring tothe
last benchmark.cpp; I was referring to the first one. Again, my 4.3 is one
month old so maybe things have further improved since.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (37 preceding siblings ...)
2008-02-27 16:59 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
@ 2008-02-27 17:06 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2008-03-02 12:15 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (12 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gnu dot org @ 2008-02-27 17:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #37 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-02-27 17:05 -------
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes
significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr wrote:
> ------- Comment #36 from jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr 2008-02-27 16:58 -------
> That's great; from the assembly code I take it that you are referring tothe
> last benchmark.cpp; I was referring to the first one. Again, my 4.3 is one
> month old so maybe things have further improved since.
No, I doubt. The last benchmark.cpp is now fully optimized, but we
might be missing something.
Paolo
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (38 preceding siblings ...)
2008-02-27 17:06 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2008-03-02 12:15 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2008-03-02 12:27 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net @ 2008-03-02 12:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #38 from michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net 2008-03-02 12:14 -------
I tried again with
g++-4.2 (GCC) 4.2.3 (Debian 4.2.3-2)
g++-4.3 (Debian 4.3-20080227-1) 4.3.0 20080227 (prerelease) [gcc-4_3-branch
revision 132730]
The problem still exists for the first two test cases.
As I noted in comment #8 there is a significant speedup from -O2 to -O3 for
g++-4.2 (18s -> 5s)
With the current g++-4.3 there is no difference between -O2 and -O3 (both 14s)
"-fforce-addr" which produced significant speedup does not exist anymore.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (39 preceding siblings ...)
2008-03-02 12:15 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
@ 2008-03-02 12:27 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2008-03-02 14:01 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gnu dot org @ 2008-03-02 12:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #39 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-03-02 12:26 -------
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes
significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
> The problem still exists for the first two test cases.
> As I noted in comment #8 there is a significant speedup from -O2 to -O3 for
> g++-4.2 (18s -> 5s)
> With the current g++-4.3 there is no difference between -O2 and -O3 (both 14s)
> "-fforce-addr" which produced significant speedup does not exist anymore.
So maybe we need to restore part of -fforce-addr's behavior, but not the
one that caused regressions.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (40 preceding siblings ...)
2008-03-02 12:27 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2008-03-02 14:01 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-03-14 17:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-03-02 14:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #40 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-02 14:00 -------
I think new analysis is necessary first -- what is exactly causing the speed
difference?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
GCC target triplet| |i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*
Keywords| |missed-optimization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (41 preceding siblings ...)
2008-03-02 14:01 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-03-14 17:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-06-06 15:00 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-03-14 17:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Known to fail| |4.3.0
Target Milestone|4.3.0 |4.3.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (42 preceding siblings ...)
2008-03-14 17:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-06-06 15:00 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-08-27 22:05 ` jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-06-06 15:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #41 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-06 14:58 -------
4.3.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|4.3.1 |4.3.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (43 preceding siblings ...)
2008-06-06 15:00 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-08-27 22:05 ` jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-08-29 13:14 ` amonakov at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-08-27 22:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #42 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-27 22:02 -------
4.3.2 is released, changing milestones to 4.3.3.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|4.3.2 |4.3.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (44 preceding siblings ...)
2008-08-27 22:05 ` jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-08-29 13:14 ` amonakov at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-12-25 18:14 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: amonakov at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-08-29 13:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #43 from amonakov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-29 13:12 -------
Checking original testcase times on x86_64 prescott with gentoo 4.2, 4.3 and
today's trunk:
2.960s g++-4.2.4 (GCC) 4.2.4 (Gentoo 4.2.4 p1.0)
2.916s g++-4.3.1 (Gentoo 4.3.1-r1 p1.1) 4.3.1
3.993s g++ (GCC) 4.4.0 20080829 (experimental)
2.796s g++ (GCC) 4.4.0 20080829 (experimental) with --param
max-inline-insns-auto=126
So I believe lack of inlining is the biggest 4.4's problem. We do not inline
3x3 matrix multiplication in benchmark loop.
While looking at it I found that einline2 dump does not always show the reason
for not inlining. I would like to propose the following patch:
--- a/gcc/ipa-inline.c
+++ b/gcc/ipa-inline.c
@@ -1494,6 +1494,8 @@ cgraph_decide_inlining_incrementally (struct cgraph_node
*node,
}
if (cgraph_default_inline_p (e->callee, &failed_reason))
inlined |= try_inline (e, mode, depth);
+ else if (dump_file)
+ fprintf (dump_file, "Not inlining: %s.\n", failed_reason);
}
node->aux = (void *)(size_t) old_mode;
return inlined;
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (45 preceding siblings ...)
2008-08-29 13:14 ` amonakov at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-12-25 18:14 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-12-30 1:50 ` Joey dot ye at intel dot com
` (4 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-12-25 18:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #44 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-25 18:13 -------
Does anyone have new numbers?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (46 preceding siblings ...)
2008-12-25 18:14 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-12-30 1:50 ` Joey dot ye at intel dot com
2008-12-30 8:04 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: Joey dot ye at intel dot com @ 2008-12-30 1:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #45 from Joey dot ye at intel dot com 2008-12-30 01:49 -------
(In reply to comment #44)
> Does anyone have new numbers?
Fixed on both i386/x86_64:
x86_64:
4.4 (trunk 142847): 5.4s
4.3.2 release: 5.4s
4.2.4 release: 5.4s
i386:
4.4 (trunk 142847): 2.7s
4.3.2 release: 2.8s
4.2.4 release: 2.7s
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (47 preceding siblings ...)
2008-12-30 1:50 ` Joey dot ye at intel dot com
@ 2008-12-30 8:04 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2009-01-24 10:28 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gnu dot org @ 2008-12-30 8:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #46 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-12-30 08:02 -------
What benchmark.cpp was that? And did you test -O2 or -O3?
Thanks!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (48 preceding siblings ...)
2008-12-30 8:04 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2009-01-24 10:28 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-02-01 8:14 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2009-02-01 10:45 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-01-24 10:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #47 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-24 10:19 -------
GCC 4.3.3 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|4.3.3 |4.3.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (49 preceding siblings ...)
2009-01-24 10:28 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-02-01 8:14 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2009-02-01 10:45 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gnu dot org @ 2009-02-01 8:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #48 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-01 08:14 -------
Fixed on the trunk with the original testcase:
4.2 -O2 0m13.897s
4.2 -O3 miscompiled
4.4 -O2/-O3 0m8.714s
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 compared to 4.2
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
` (50 preceding siblings ...)
2009-02-01 8:14 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2009-02-01 10:45 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
51 siblings, 0 replies; 54+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-02-01 10:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|4.3.4 |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33604
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 54+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-02-01 10:45 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-09-30 21:13 [Bug c++/33604] New: significantly slower results with 4.3 compared to 4.2 michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2007-09-30 21:15 ` [Bug c++/33604] " michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2007-10-01 9:47 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-10-01 21:03 ` [Bug c++/33604] [4.3 Regression] Revision 119502 causes " hjl at lucon dot org
2007-10-01 21:04 ` hjl at lucon dot org
2007-10-01 21:07 ` Daniel Berlin
2007-10-01 21:07 ` dberlin at dberlin dot org
2007-10-22 8:33 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-05 1:47 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-06 17:10 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-06 18:55 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2007-11-06 20:08 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-06 21:01 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2007-11-06 21:23 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-06 21:51 ` [Bug tree-optimization/33604] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-07 6:03 ` paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch
2007-11-07 12:14 ` dnovillo at google dot com
2007-11-07 13:09 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-07 13:10 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-07 14:22 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-07 16:03 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-07 16:26 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-07 16:36 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-11-07 17:28 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-07 20:59 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
2007-11-08 6:12 ` paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch
2007-11-09 12:32 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-09 12:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-09 12:49 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
2007-11-09 12:52 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2007-11-09 12:56 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
2007-12-04 10:56 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2007-12-04 11:18 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2007-12-04 11:21 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-12-04 12:17 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2007-12-04 12:38 ` paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch
2008-01-02 11:17 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-02-27 16:36 ` [Bug tree-optimization/33604] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 119502 causes significantly slower results with 4.3/4.4 " jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
2008-02-27 16:44 ` [Bug target/33604] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-02-27 16:59 ` jacob at math dot jussieu dot fr
2008-02-27 17:06 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2008-03-02 12:15 ` michael dot olbrich at gmx dot net
2008-03-02 12:27 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2008-03-02 14:01 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-03-14 17:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-06-06 15:00 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-08-27 22:05 ` jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-08-29 13:14 ` amonakov at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-12-25 18:14 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-12-30 1:50 ` Joey dot ye at intel dot com
2008-12-30 8:04 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2009-01-24 10:28 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-02-01 8:14 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2009-02-01 10:45 ` rguenth 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).