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 88A0C384DB4B; Thu, 15 Feb 2024 13:10:31 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 88A0C384DB4B
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1708002631;
	bh=U1iv8YWTs9dcM08O4ACcgQlq8MDaFnnr23pv1HSSzII=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=S3+j4QwdC8th79LvDzahjdnTpvRrzjBt/9SG71nTYokdr5HsnkWQy/u9ceFbqgDoD
	 x/N+hIcdtWTrdh3qT7CZtnKEzAScHU93MeRa6VfomWl/Ek6g89ey/aan8Ps7Gwwxnc
	 dGbBdvbPCMKWAJpsNOizjMvT+YqLbqcDzvrx6cSs=
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/113807] [performance] bitset::set not using memset
 opportunity
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 13:10:30 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi 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: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-113807-4-Zcyinrifqq@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-113807-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-113807-4@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=3D113807

--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Hmm, yes, the code for bitset<N>::set() is actually similar to what we get =
for
foo() in comment 5. The new version with memset does produce different
(vectorized?) code though.

For operator=3D=3D the current code is quite branchy, and looks better with=
 memcmp
to me (but I don't really know what I'm talking about).=