[Bug c++/36861] New: code generation regression with -O3

[Bug c++/36861] New: code generation regression with -O3

[lothar at tradescape dot biz]

gcc 4.3.1 generates code with -O3 that is more than 10 times slower than with
-O0. gcc 4.2.3 does not show this behavior. I am going to attach the test case
that I used to produce these numbers:

with gcc 4.2.3:
( time ./avltest-nn >/dev/null; time ./avltest-no >/dev/null; time ./avltest-on
>/dev/null; time ./avltest-oo >/dev/null; )

real    0m1.112s
user    0m1.028s
sys     0m0.012s

real    0m0.078s
user    0m0.060s
sys     0m0.008s

real    0m0.940s
user    0m0.916s
sys     0m0.008s

real    0m0.088s
user    0m0.072s
sys     0m0.004s


with gcc 4.3.1:
( time ./avltest-nn >/dev/null; time ./avltest-no >/dev/null; time ./avltest-on
>/dev/null; time ./avltest-oo >/dev/null; )

real    0m0.974s
user    0m0.948s
sys     0m0.004s

real    0m12.936s
user    0m12.893s
sys     0m0.016s

real    0m1.128s
user    0m1.012s
sys     0m0.000s

real    0m0.104s
user    0m0.076s
sys     0m0.004s

Here is the information about the compilers used:

$ /opt2/linux/ix86/bin/g++-4.2.3 -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-4.2.3/configure --program-suffix=-4.2.3
--enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-languages=c,c++,java --prefix=/opt2/linux/ix86
--target=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --with-sysroot=/opt2/linux/ix86/gcc-sysroot
--enable-version-specific-runtime-libs --enable-clocale=gnu
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.2.3

$ /opt2/linux/ix86/bin/g++-4.3.1 -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-4.3.1/configure --enable-targets=all --enable-multilib
--enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-languages=c,c++,java
--enable-version-specific-runtime-libs --disable-nls --enable-clocale=gnu
--program-suffix=-4.3.1 --prefix=/opt2/linux/ix86 --target=i686-pc-linux-gnu
--target=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --with-sysroot=/opt2/linux/ix86/gcc-sysroot
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.3.1 (GCC)


-- 
           Summary: code generation regression with -O3
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.3.1
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: major
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: lothar at tradescape dot biz
GCC target triplet: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug c++/36861] code generation regression with -O3

[lothar at tradescape dot biz]

------- Comment #1 from lothar at tradescape dot biz  2008-07-17 07:28 -------
Created an attachment (id=15921)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15921&action=view)
test case to reproduce the problem


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug c++/36861] code generation regression with -O3

[lothar at tradescape dot biz]

------- Comment #2 from lothar at tradescape dot biz  2008-07-17 16:54 -------
Created an attachment (id=15923)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15923&action=view)
updated testcase

changed the test case to resemble my application a bit closer. Here it is
almost 40 times slower with -O3 than with -O0

The other strange thing with our app (that I can NOT recreate with a test case
so far) is that if I use -DUSE_OPTIMIZATION=1 in my app the -O3 compiled
version seems to go into an infinite loop.


real    0m1.586s
user    0m0.988s
sys     0m0.020s

real    0m40.963s
user    0m40.655s
sys     0m0.048s

real    0m2.457s
user    0m1.976s
sys     0m0.020s

real    0m0.291s
user    0m0.164s
sys     0m0.020s


-- 

lothar at tradescape dot biz changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #15921|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug c++/36861] code generation regression with -O3

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-07-17 17:42 -------
Please provide preprocessed source for the testcase which you get when
appending -save-temps to the compilation command.  It will be called
avltest.ii.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |                            |org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] code generation regression with -O3

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-07-17 17:47 -------
Does -O3 -fno-tree-vectorize cause the speed back to normal?

Not everyone has boost installed :).


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Severity|major                       |normal
          Component|c++                         |tree-optimization


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] code generation regression with -O3

[lothar at tradescape dot biz]

------- Comment #5 from lothar at tradescape dot biz  2008-07-17 17:50 -------
Created an attachment (id=15924)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15924&action=view)
the preprocessed file for case that is slower


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] code generation regression with -O3

[lothar at tradescape dot biz]

------- Comment #6 from lothar at tradescape dot biz  2008-07-17 17:52 -------
in reply to #4:
-fno-tree-vectorize does not help

$ /opt2/linux/ix86/bin/g++-4.3.1 -m64 -O3 -fno-tree-vectorize -g -save-temps
-I/opt2/linux/x86_64/include/boost-1_35 -DUSE_OPTIMIZATION=0 -o ./avltest-no
./avltest.cpp
./avltest.cpp:115:2: warning: #warning without optimization
$ time ./avltest-no >/dev/null

real    0m40.528s
user    0m39.902s
sys     0m0.036s


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] code generation regression with -O3

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-07-17 18:01 -------
pointer_plus_2_bits will confuse points-to alias analysis galore.  Of course
this doesn't explain the difference to -O0.

Still, -O1 is fast, -O1 -fstrict-aliasing is _very_ slow.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |alias, missed-optimization


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] code generation regression with -O3

[lothar at tradescape dot biz]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 315 bytes --]



------- Comment #8 from lothar at tradescape dot biz  2008-07-17 18:09 -------
If you have questions about the internal implementation of the boost avl tree
you can contact Ion Gaztañaga igaztanaga at gmail dot com. He is aware of this
problem already.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] [4.3 Regression] code generation regression with -O3

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Summary|code generation regression  |[4.3 Regression] code
                   |with -O3                    |generation regression with -
                   |                            |O3
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.3.2


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] [4.3 Regression] code generation regression with -O3

[lothar at tradescape dot biz]

------- Comment #9 from lothar at tradescape dot biz  2008-07-17 20:15 -------
in reply to #7:

Does this mean the status is no longer UNCONFIRMED?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] [4.3 Regression] code generation regression with -O3

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-07-17 20:19 -------
No, it's still not analyzed.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-07-22 21:43 -------
I think someone needs to kick the hell out of boost for making crappy code.  I
am going to remove the regression marker for now because it is definitely a bit
weird what boost is doing and not normal for real code.


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Summary|[4.3 Regression] code       |boost's compressed avl
                   |generation regression with -|confuses GCC
                   |O3                          |
   Target Milestone|4.3.2                       |---


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[lothar at tradescape dot biz]

------- Comment #13 from lothar at tradescape dot biz  2008-07-22 21:48 -------
(In reply to comment #11)
>From an application perspective it is still a regression, as it works happily
with gcc 4.2.3


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-07-22 21:52 -------
(In reply to comment #13)
> (In reply to comment #11)
> From an application perspective it is still a regression, as it works happily
> with gcc 4.2.3

Yes but it is boost's fault that boost tries to be smart about space
optimizations when they should not have.  It really does confuse the hell out
of compilers, doing what they are doing.  C/C++ was not designed the way they
think it was.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[lothar at tradescape dot biz]

------- Comment #15 from lothar at tradescape dot biz  2008-07-22 22:01 -------
What I am worried about is that if it is not marked as a regression nobody
cares to fix it although it breaks a real application that works with gcc
4.3.2.

If you have any insights how to improve the boost intrusive library to avoid
confusing gcc I am sure the boost people are happy to hear them and to
incorporate them in the upcoming boost release.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[igaztanaga at gmail dot com]

------- Comment #17 from igaztanaga at gmail dot com  2008-07-23 08:03 -------
Andrew, I think I do write some crappy code, but the slowdown is also present
in the non-optimized version.

FWIW, there are STL implementations that embed the color bit in rbtrees in the
parent pointer so the optimization is not that strange. Maybe my implementation
is not correct and that's why the size-optimized version ends in an infinite
loop.

And we have tons of two-way pointers in production code. Too much crappy code
to ignore, I'm afraid.


-- 

igaztanaga at gmail dot com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |igaztanaga at gmail dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] [4.3 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[drow at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #18 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-07-24 22:18 -------
Putting the regression marker back.  The code doesn't matter; if it's a
regression, then it's regression.


-- 

drow at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Summary|boost's compressed avl      |[4.3 Regression] boost's
                   |confuses GCC                |compressed avl confuses GCC


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] [4.3 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[lothar at tradescape dot biz]

------- Comment #19 from lothar at tradescape dot biz  2008-07-28 18:55 -------
Created an attachment (id=15973)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15973&action=view)
oprofile logs

I compiled optimized executables with and without -fno-strict-aliasing and
generated an oprofile log for them:

/opt2/linux/ix86/bin/g++-4.3.1 -m64 -O3 -no-strict-aliasing -g
-I/opt2/linux/x86_64/include/boost-1_35 -DUSE_OPTIMIZATION=0 -o ./avltest-non
./avltest.cpp
/opt2/linux/ix86/bin/g++-4.3.1 -m64 -O3 -fno-strict-aliasing -g
-I/opt2/linux/x86_64/include/boost-1_35 -DUSE_OPTIMIZATION=0 -o ./avltest-non
./avltest.cpp
sudo opcontrol --reset; sudo opcontrol --start; ./avltest-no; ./avltest-non ;
sudo opcontrol --stop
opannotate --source --assembly --demangle=smart --threshold=1 ./avltest-no
>./avltest-no.oprofile.txt
opannotate --source --assembly --demangle=smart --threshold=1 ./avltest-non
>./avltest-non.oprofile.txt
diff -u ./avltest-no.oprofile.txt ./avltest-non.oprofile.txt
./avltest-diff.oprofile.txt

$ time ./avltest-non
sizeof(Node)=72
sizeof(NodeSet)=40
creating file ./avltest.img done
region.get_address()=0x7f4d43ed1000
region.get_size()=3600056
p_set=0x7f4d43ed1000
p_values=0x7f4d43ed1030
created/inserted 50000 entries
region.get_address()=0x7f4d43b62000
region.get_size()=3600056
p_set=0x7f4d43b62000
p_values=0x7f4d43b62030
checked 50000 entries, result=1249975000

real    0m0.614s
user    0m0.140s
sys     0m0.016s

$ time ./avltest-no
sizeof(Node)=72
sizeof(NodeSet)=40
creating file ./avltest.img done
region.get_address()=0x7f7fdce43000
region.get_size()=3600056
p_set=0x7f7fdce43000
p_values=0x7f7fdce43030
created/inserted 50000 entries
region.get_address()=0x7f7fdcad4000
region.get_size()=3600056
p_set=0x7f7fdcad4000
p_values=0x7f7fdcad4030
checked 50000 entries, result=1249975000

real    0m22.634s
user    0m22.277s
sys     0m0.120s

I hope these tests aid in finding the problem


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] [4.3 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[lothar at tradescape dot biz]

------- Comment #20 from lothar at tradescape dot biz  2008-07-31 02:01 -------
With all the supplied test cases and data, why is it so hard to move the bug
out of the UNCONFIRMED state. It should be fairly easy to confirm that it is a
problem by running the attached test.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] [4.3 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #21 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-07-31 07:56 -------
Lothar, see #10


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] [4.3 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |                            |org
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.3.3


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] [4.3/4.4 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #22 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-09-20 14:25 -------
This PR is still very weird.  For the curious here are the numbers, now
with numbers from trunk included:

4.3 -O: 0.4s
4.3 -O -fstrict-aliasing: 59s
4.4 -O: 1m3s
4.4 -O -fstrict-aliasing: 0.4s
4.4 -O2: 0.3s
4.4 -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing: 0.2s

?!


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Known to fail|4.3.1                       |4.3.1 4.4.0
            Summary|[4.3 Regression] boost's    |[4.3/4.4 Regression] boost's
                   |compressed avl confuses GCC |compressed avl confuses GCC


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug tree-optimization/36861] [4.3/4.4 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #23 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-09-20 14:27 -------
Created an attachment (id=16368)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16368&action=view)
unincluded testcase

Unincluded testcase attached.

I'll leave this at P3 so some brave soul might eventually pick up the
analysis.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug target/36861] [4.3/4.4 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[lothar at tradescape dot biz]

------- Comment #25 from lothar at tradescape dot biz  2008-10-10 15:58 -------
I was running the code on my Lenovo T61 Laptop:

$ cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor       : 0
vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
cpu family      : 6
model           : 15
model name      : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU     T7700  @ 2.40GHz
stepping        : 10
cpu MHz         : 800.000
cache size      : 4096 KB
physical id     : 0
siblings        : 2
core id         : 0
cpu cores       : 2
fpu             : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level     : 10
wp              : yes
flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov
pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx lm
constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good pni monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2
ssse3 cx16 xtpr lahf_lm ida
bogomips        : 4793.98
clflush size    : 64
cache_alignment : 64
address sizes   : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management:

processor       : 1
vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
cpu family      : 6
model           : 15
model name      : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU     T7700  @ 2.40GHz
stepping        : 10
cpu MHz         : 800.000
cache size      : 4096 KB
physical id     : 0
siblings        : 2
core id         : 1
cpu cores       : 2
fpu             : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level     : 10
wp              : yes
flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov
pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx lm
constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good pni monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2
ssse3 cx16 xtpr lahf_lm ida
bogomips        : 4787.49
clflush size    : 64
cache_alignment : 64
address sizes   : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management:


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug target/36861] [4.3/4.4 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #26 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-10-22 03:02 -------
Richard has reproduced the bad behavior.  So, this is not UNCONFIRMED.  It's an
optimization regression; hence P2.


-- 

mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
           Priority|P3                          |P2
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2008-10-22 03:02:05
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug target/36861] [4.3/4.4 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #27 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-01-24 10:20 -------
GCC 4.3.3 is being released, adjusting target milestone.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|4.3.3                       |4.3.4


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug target/36861] [4.3/4.4 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[bonzini at gnu dot org]

------- Comment #28 from bonzini at gnu dot org  2009-02-03 09:54 -------
Am I right that the bug is just at -O, not at -O2?  4.4 -O2 is worse than 4.4
-O2 -fno-strict-aliasing, but are they better than 4.3 -O2 or worse?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug target/36861] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #29 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-08-04 12:29 -------
GCC 4.3.4 is being released, adjusting target milestone.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|4.3.4                       |4.3.5


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug target/36861] [4.5 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #30 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-03-16 13:15 -------
I do have updated numbers.

4.3.[012] -O3: 57s
4.3.[34] -O[123]: 0.4s
4.4.[0123] -O[123]: 0.4s
4.5 -O0: 1.6s
4.5 -O[123]: 50s (*sigh*)

that makes it fixed on the release branches and a 4.5 regression only.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Known to fail|4.3.1 4.4.0                 |4.3.2 4.5.0
      Known to work|4.2.3                       |4.2.3 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.4.0
                   |                            |4.4.3
            Summary|[4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression]    |[4.5 Regression] boost's
                   |boost's compressed avl      |compressed avl confuses GCC
                   |confuses GCC                |
   Target Milestone|4.3.5                       |4.5.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug target/36861] [4.5 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #31 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-04-06 11:19 -------
GCC 4.5.0 is being released.  Deferring to 4.5.1.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|4.5.0                       |4.5.1


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug target/36861] [4.5/4.6 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #32 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-07-05 15:40 -------
Re-confirmed for current 4.5 branch and trunk.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Last reconfirmed|2008-10-22 03:02:05         |2010-07-05 15:40:28
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug target/36861] [4.5/4.6 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #33 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-07-05 16:03 -------
Using valgrind there are randomly reported errors, so this is likely either
an invalid testcase or a miscompile that manifests itself as runtime
regression.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|missed-optimization         |wrong-code


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861

[Bug target/36861] [4.5/4.6 Regression] boost's compressed avl confuses GCC

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #34 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-07-31 09:29 -------
GCC 4.5.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|4.5.1                       |4.5.2


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861