* [Bug tree-optimization/103423] [12 Regression] 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto since r12-3903-g0288527f47cec669
2021-11-25 8:43 [Bug tree-optimization/103423] New: 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto between g:0b7a11874d4eb428 and g:704e8a825c78b9a8 hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-25 9:35 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-25 22:17 ` hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz
` (5 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-25 9:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103423
Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed| |2021-11-25
Blocks| |26163
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Summary|19% cpu2006 wrf compile |[12 Regression] 19% cpu2006
|time regression with -flto |wrf compile time regression
|between g:0b7a11874d4eb428 |with -flto since
|and g:704e8a825c78b9a8 |r12-3903-g0288527f47cec669
CC| |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |amacleod at redhat dot com,
| |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Referenced Bugs:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
[Bug 26163] [meta-bug] missed optimization in SPEC (2k17, 2k and 2k6 and 95)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/103423] [12 Regression] 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto since r12-3903-g0288527f47cec669
2021-11-25 8:43 [Bug tree-optimization/103423] New: 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto between g:0b7a11874d4eb428 and g:704e8a825c78b9a8 hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-25 9:35 ` [Bug tree-optimization/103423] [12 Regression] 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto since r12-3903-g0288527f47cec669 marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-25 22:17 ` hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz
2021-11-26 8:58 ` [Bug tree-optimization/103423] [12 Regression] 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto since r12-2353-g8da8ed435e9f01b3 marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz @ 2021-11-25 22:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103423
--- Comment #1 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
Martin,
My original report here was on regression at July 17 2021 (range
g:0b7a11874d4eb428 and g:704e8a825c78b9a8)
which seems unrelated to g:r12-3903-g0288527f47cec669
which is in Sep 21 2021
I think we are mixing up the cpu2006 and cpu2017 wrf's that seems to
regress on different times.
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103423
>
> Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> See Also| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
> | |a/show_bug.cgi?id=103409
>
> --
> You are receiving this mail because:
> You reported the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/103423] [12 Regression] 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto since r12-2353-g8da8ed435e9f01b3
2021-11-25 8:43 [Bug tree-optimization/103423] New: 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto between g:0b7a11874d4eb428 and g:704e8a825c78b9a8 hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-25 9:35 ` [Bug tree-optimization/103423] [12 Regression] 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto since r12-3903-g0288527f47cec669 marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-25 22:17 ` hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz
@ 2021-11-26 8:58 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-26 9:12 ` hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz
` (3 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-26 8:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103423
Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|[12 Regression] 19% cpu2006 |[12 Regression] 19% cpu2006
|wrf compile time regression |wrf compile time regression
|with -flto since |with -flto since
|r12-3903-g0288527f47cec669 |r12-2353-g8da8ed435e9f01b3
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Oh, you are right, then it started with r12-2353-g8da8ed435e9f01b3.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/103423] [12 Regression] 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto since r12-2353-g8da8ed435e9f01b3
2021-11-25 8:43 [Bug tree-optimization/103423] New: 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto between g:0b7a11874d4eb428 and g:704e8a825c78b9a8 hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-26 8:58 ` [Bug tree-optimization/103423] [12 Regression] 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto since r12-2353-g8da8ed435e9f01b3 marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-26 9:12 ` hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz
2021-11-26 9:18 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz @ 2021-11-26 9:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103423
--- Comment #3 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> Oh, you are right, then it started with r12-2353-g8da8ed435e9f01b3.
OK so mine, (as I sort of suspected :)
If it is easy for you to get -ftime-report of before and after
build, it would be great to attach it. I will try to reproduce this
with -fno-ipa-modref on current tree.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/103423] [12 Regression] 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto since r12-2353-g8da8ed435e9f01b3
2021-11-25 8:43 [Bug tree-optimization/103423] New: 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto between g:0b7a11874d4eb428 and g:704e8a825c78b9a8 hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-26 9:12 ` hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz
@ 2021-11-26 9:18 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-18 14:15 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-18 14:27 ` hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-26 9:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103423
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> If it is easy for you to get -ftime-report of before and after
> build, it would be great to attach it.
Please do it yourself, I'm doing another wrf long-running bisection.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/103423] [12 Regression] 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto since r12-2353-g8da8ed435e9f01b3
2021-11-25 8:43 [Bug tree-optimization/103423] New: 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto between g:0b7a11874d4eb428 and g:704e8a825c78b9a8 hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-26 9:18 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-01-18 14:15 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-18 14:27 ` hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-01-18 14:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103423
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed, the links now show better than ever numbers.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/103423] [12 Regression] 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto since r12-2353-g8da8ed435e9f01b3
2021-11-25 8:43 [Bug tree-optimization/103423] New: 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto between g:0b7a11874d4eb428 and g:704e8a825c78b9a8 hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2022-01-18 14:15 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-01-18 14:27 ` hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz @ 2022-01-18 14:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103423
--- Comment #6 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> Fixed, the links now show better than ever numbers.
It is only fixed by not inlining enough (since I added
--param max-inline-functions-called-once). Without LTO we still have
quite important slowdown.
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=332.270.8&plot.1=304.270.8&plot.2=340.270.8&plot.3=272.270.8&plot.4=392.270.8&plot.5=411.270.8&plot.6=291.270.8&
Do we want to open separate PR for that?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread