public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/50164] [IRA, 4.7 Regression] Performance degradation due to increased memory instructions count
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 09:36:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-50164-4-dj0URPIcnf@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-50164-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50164

--- Comment #2 from Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com> 2011-08-25 09:31:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Yesterday I sent a patch
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-08/msg01954.html which most probably
> solved the problem.
> 
> Now I have code size 419 (gcc 4.6) vs 411 (gcc as of Aug 24) bytes for the
> test.

I tried it but unfortunately it did not solve the regression. We still have xk
on the stack and x1.5 more memory accesses in GCC 4.7 assembly for mentioned
code part. GCC 4.6 produces bigger but faster code.

Problem somehow appears only when -march=atom is used. There is no degradation
if generic arch is used. I compared GCC 4.7 dumps for "-O2 -m32" and "-O2 -m32
-march=atom" and found that RTLs are same before IRA and differ after IRA. 

How does -march=atom affects register allocation?


  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-08-25  9:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-08-23 14:39 [Bug target/50164] New: " enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com
2011-08-24 16:15 ` [Bug target/50164] " vmakarov at redhat dot com
2011-08-24 18:10 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-08-25  9:36 ` enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com [this message]
2011-08-25 14:28 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-08-26 21:30 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-08-29  7:30 ` enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com
2011-08-29  8:04 ` enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com
2011-08-30 10:52 ` enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com
2011-08-30 11:30 ` enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com
2011-10-27 10:04 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-27 20:29 ` izamyatin at gmail dot com
2011-10-28 10:11 ` enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com

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-50164-4-dj0URPIcnf@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).