From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-365987-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 6465 invoked by alias); 21 Aug 2011 12:01:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 6452 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Aug 2011 12:01:18 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT,RCVD_IN_PSBL,RCVD_IN_RP_RNBL,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz (HELO artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz) (195.113.26.195)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 21 Aug 2011 12:01:04 +0000
Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz (atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz [195.113.26.193])	by artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D9D498612;	Sun, 21 Aug 2011 14:01:03 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix, from userid 4018)	id DF412F01B5; Sun, 21 Aug 2011 14:01:02 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 12:01:00 -0000
From: Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz>
To: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Cc: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [Bug target/50135] Loop optimization.
Message-ID: <20110821120102.GA21785@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
References: <bug-50135-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> <bug-50135-4-JHa7Qwr9mj@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <bug-50135-4-JHa7Qwr9mj@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-08/txt/msg01761.txt.bz2

> I bet we have a duplicate report for not using the x86 loop instruction.
Well, we used to generate it until we concluded it is pointless...

Honza