From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 5E1EB3858284; Fri, 24 Feb 2023 10:26:55 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 5E1EB3858284
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1677234415;
	bh=9H/GVN047sixtLZDHtEynUcHQP2RdAzY28qVTWffU2A=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=SEAtPiHRFrlWT9e/5Vf/oN9Xu7qfg8VgEO7IT3bIF8npGc4tKJvSZZWK4jD+tBwks
	 lFiJCp01jXITe17zl++pWe0nV+3SuKdUGNDY4tEFUr3EUPEjzwGvDALaxHU1N+Vi0k
	 fm9D6H+7H7D/++uNayovWNpItlzNMuPfPi2DpsYM=
From: "rvmallad at amazon dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/107409] Perf loss ~5% on 519.lbm_r SPEC
 cpu2017 benchmark with r10-5090-ga9a4edf0e71bba
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2023 10:26:52 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rvmallad at amazon dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-107409-4-yJdqh87c4M@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107409-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107409-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D107409

--- Comment #21 from Rama Malladi <rvmallad at amazon dot com> ---
I did another triage for perf loss on Graviton 2 processor (neoverse-n1) ba=
sed
instance and found this commit: `a9a4edf0e71bbac9f1b5dcecdcf9250111d16889` =
to
be the reason. As I had indicated in my earlier reply, I was doing a triage=
 of
perf loss going from gcc-7 to gcc-10.

The perf of 519.libm_r 1-copy run improved 1.08x with the revert of commit:
`a9a4edf0e71bbac9f1b5dcecdcf9250111d16889` on gcc-mainline (
`2f1691be517fcdcabae9cd671ab511eb0e08b1d5`).

I am guessing that we don't see it on LNT/ Altra CPUs.

So, please look into this issue fix. Let me know if you have any queries.
Thanks.=