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 CF7753858C5F; Wed, 17 May 2023 14:10:08 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org CF7753858C5F
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1684332608;
	bh=Fo5ltRWdP6w0evDEGP41SmPRSab1CZ1eLj5QVZRuW4E=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=sgbEvo717PtxKBWX5TfBulfTByEHVI455GTHyRcALUjVo/tQzKu3k4jvu7Uq7VLi6
	 VgLDW1Q9bZnWFpo+dLU6n2fRs/FyetjDSzuxE5ZGWrXG0Knjgk9i65ijRbiiM4wXlZ
	 88aXvRBc9wOzBPhIsputhPIw3xIjMCeDdnkSnqIo=
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/109811] libjxl 0.7 is a lot slower in GCC 13.1 vs Clang
 16
Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 14:10:08 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.1.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-109811-4-oLG53wVXuY@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-109811-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-109811-4@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=3D109811

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to JuzheZhong from comment #7)
> It seems that Clang has better performance than GCC in case of no vectori=
zer?

That is very general statement.  On some particular code, some particular a=
rch,
with some particular flags Clang performs better than GCC, on other it is t=
he
other way around, on some it is wash.  How it performs on larger amounts of
code can be seen from standard benchmarks like SPEC, the Phoronix benchmark
suite is known not to be a very good benchmark for various reasons, but that
doesn't mean it isn't worth looking at it.=