From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13829 invoked by alias); 24 Jan 2009 09:56:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 12485 invoked by uid 48); 24 Jan 2009 09:56:39 -0000 Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 09:56:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20090124095639.12484.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug target/38824] [4.4 Regression] performance regression of sse code from 4.2/4.3 In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "tim at klingt dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-01/txt/msg02531.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #9 from tim at klingt dot org 2009-01-24 09:56 ------- > Hi tim, I extracted this test case from your website. But I can't exactly > reproduce this bug on my machine with a core2 quard micor processor. Can you > help me to check whether my test case is valid firstly? Here I post what I got > on my machine for your reference: the benchmark test case looks fine. the times on my machine: gcc-4.2: tim@thinkpad:~/sandbox$ time ./a.out real 0m1.852s user 0m1.829s sys 0m0.010s tim@thinkpad:~/sandbox$ time ./a.out real 0m1.826s user 0m1.817s sys 0m0.002s tim@thinkpad:~/sandbox$ time ./a.out real 0m1.833s user 0m1.826s sys 0m0.001s gcc-4.3: time ./a.out real 0m2.062s user 0m2.047s sys 0m0.002s tim@thinkpad:~/sandbox$ time ./a.out real 0m2.061s user 0m2.043s sys 0m0.006s tim@thinkpad:~/sandbox$ time ./a.out real 0m2.101s user 0m2.053s sys 0m0.036s gcc-4.4 (20090111): tim@thinkpad:~/sandbox$ time ./a.out real 0m2.536s user 0m2.481s sys 0m0.017s tim@thinkpad:~/sandbox$ time ./a.out real 0m2.497s user 0m2.467s sys 0m0.003s tim@thinkpad:~/sandbox$ time ./a.out real 0m2.539s user 0m2.484s sys 0m0.036s best, tim -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38824