public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/46556] Code size regression in struct access
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 11:20:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-46556-4-CWmNSlNfq8@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-46556-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46556

--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> 2010-11-22 11:15:01 UTC ---
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, amodra at gmail dot com wrote:

> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46556
> 
> --- Comment #4 from Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> 2010-11-22 10:47:24 UTC ---
> But within a loop gcc-4.2 looked quite reasonable too..

Of course.

> Don't we have a pass ordering problem if fwprop is to rewrite addresses?  We
> currently have cse1, fwprop1, loop passes, cse2, fwprop2.

Well, fwprop was only a suggestion (I can't think of something better
right now, maybe apart from expand (ugh), or better a pattern recognizer
before expand).

We really can't rely on expression canonicalization fold does for
addressing mode selection.  We have to do this somewhere else
(and IVOPTs does it for code inside loops).


  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-11-22 11:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-11-19  9:04 [Bug rtl-optimization/46556] New: " amodra at gmail dot com
2010-11-21 23:12 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/46556] " amodra at gmail dot com
2010-11-22 10:24 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-22 10:43 ` amodra at gmail dot com
2010-11-22 10:50 ` amodra at gmail dot com
2010-11-22 11:20 ` rguenther at suse dot de [this message]
2010-11-22 11:49 ` steven at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-01-19  8:50 ` amodra at gmail dot com
2011-02-07 11:42 ` steven at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-06-28 16:12 ` [Bug tree-optimization/46556] " wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-01 13:04 ` wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-01 13:05 ` wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-01 13:06 ` wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-01 17:53 ` steven at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-01 18:43 ` wschmidt 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-46556-4-CWmNSlNfq8@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: link
Be 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).