From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26421 invoked by alias); 24 Oct 2011 19:59:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 26410 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Oct 2011 19:59:44 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,TW_DX X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 19:59:30 +0000 From: "xinliangli at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/50182] Performance degradation from gcc 4.1 (x86_64) Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 19:59:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: target X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: xinliangli at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-10/txt/msg02496.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182 --- Comment #22 from davidxl 2011-10-24 19:58:23 UTC --- (In reply to comment #21) > OK, just in case, here is my current test. Preprocessed test case? I saw the main assembly difference that can explain the performance diff, but want to make sure it is not due to your new source change (I saw some print statement addeded). David