public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/38059] [4.4/4.5 Regression] Compile time regression for gcc.dg/20020425-1.c
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 08:35:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090401083543.11494.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-38059-276@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>



------- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-04-01 08:35 -------
You haven't shown how long did it take in earlier versions, this test is
already known to take eons (and when gimplify.o isn't built with optimizations
even ICE on many targets) and has /* { dg-timeout-factor 4.0 } */ already. 
What slows down the test is extremely deep recursion above 22000-33000 calls in
the backtrace (for each ONE either just gimplify_expr and gimplify_cond_expr,
or even gimplify_stmt in the backtrace).  Even a small RA decision affecting
these functions can show up when multiplied by 11000, but the testcase is
clearly artificial and not worth optimizing for.


-- 

jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Priority|P3                          |P5


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38059


  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-04-01  8:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-11-08  1:15 [Bug middle-end/38059] New: " danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-03-31 16:10 ` [Bug middle-end/38059] [4.4/4.5 Regression] " jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-04-01  8:35 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message]
2009-04-21 15:59 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-07-22 10:35 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-10-15 12:56 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-21 13:19 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-30  9:01 ` [Bug middle-end/38059] [4.4/4.5/4.6 " jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org

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=20090401083543.11494.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).