public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/104582] [11/12 Regression] Unoptimal code for __negdi2 (and others) from libgcc2 due to unwanted vectorization Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2022 08:37:32 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-104582-4-55lUmGJzcr@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-104582-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104582 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Just trying a dumb microbenchmark: struct S { unsigned long a, b; } s; __attribute__((noipa)) void foo (unsigned long a, unsigned long b) { s.a = a; s.b = b; } int main () { int i; for (i = 0; i < 1000000000; i++) foo (42, 43); return 0; } the GCC 11 vs. GCC 12 code: - movq %rdi, s(%rip) - movq %rsi, s+8(%rip) + movq %rdi, %xmm0 + movq %rsi, %xmm1 + punpcklqdq %xmm1, %xmm0 + movaps %xmm0, s(%rip) seems to be exactly the same speed (on i9-7960X) and the GCC 11 code is 7 bytes smaller.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-18 8:37 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-02-17 12:30 [Bug target/104582] New: Unoptimal code for __negdi2 (and others) from libgcc2 ubizjak at gmail dot com 2022-02-17 12:35 ` [Bug tree-optimization/104582] " ubizjak at gmail dot com 2022-02-17 12:45 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com 2022-02-17 15:28 ` [Bug tree-optimization/104582] [11/12 Regression] Unoptimal code for __negdi2 (and others) from libgcc2 due to unwanted vectorization jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-17 16:35 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-17 16:40 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-18 0:43 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-18 7:26 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-18 8:37 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2022-02-18 8:48 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-18 8:53 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-18 9:02 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-18 9:28 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2022-02-18 10:19 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-18 10:22 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-18 10:50 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-18 11:31 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-18 13:37 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-18 13:45 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-18 21:16 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-22 7:58 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-22 7:59 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-22 7:59 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-22 7:59 ` [Bug tree-optimization/104582] [11 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-04-07 8:15 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-04-21 7:51 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-29 10:06 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.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=bug-104582-4-55lUmGJzcr@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --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: linkBe 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).