public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/50182] Performance degradation from gcc 4.1 (x86_64) Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2012 08:29:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-50182-4-veM6YfpF3q@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-50182-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182 --- Comment #32 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-02 08:28:34 UTC --- For me, 4.1 is equally fast to 4.6 on my CPU and on the reduced testcase I've attached (not clear if it models what the original benchmark did right or not), and on the trunk regressed with http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176072 Before that the inner loop looked like: .L12: addl $10, %edx addb 0(%rbp,%rcx), %dl addq $1, %rcx cmpl %ecx, %ebx jg .L12 and now it looks like: .L12: movzbl 0(%rbp,%rdx), %r8d addq $1, %rdx cmpl %edx, %ebx leal 10(%rcx,%r8), %ecx jg .L12
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-02 8:29 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2011-08-24 21:27 [Bug c++/50182] New: " oleg.smolsky at gmail dot com 2011-08-24 22:30 ` [Bug target/50182] " oleg.smolsky at gmail dot com 2011-08-25 0:14 ` xinliangli at gmail dot com 2011-08-25 0:52 ` xinliangli at gmail dot com 2011-08-25 9:00 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-25 15:21 ` oleg.smolsky at gmail dot com 2011-08-25 15:29 ` oleg.smolsky at gmail dot com 2011-08-25 16:18 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-25 16:26 ` xinliangli at gmail dot com 2011-08-25 16:49 ` oleg.smolsky at gmail dot com 2011-08-25 22:48 ` oleg.smolsky at gmail dot com 2011-08-26 7:12 ` oleg.smolsky at gmail dot com 2011-08-30 20:37 ` matt at use dot net 2011-09-15 16:57 ` oleg at smolsky dot net 2011-09-15 17:39 ` xinliangli at gmail dot com 2011-10-21 23:02 ` xinliangli at gmail dot com 2011-10-24 18:28 ` oleg at smolsky dot net 2011-10-24 18:28 ` oleg at smolsky dot net 2011-10-24 18:33 ` oleg at smolsky dot net 2011-10-24 19:34 ` xinliangli at gmail dot com 2011-10-24 19:50 ` oleg at smolsky dot net 2011-10-24 19:59 ` xinliangli at gmail dot com 2011-10-24 21:12 ` oleg at smolsky dot net 2011-10-24 23:00 ` xinliangli at gmail dot com 2011-10-24 23:03 ` xinliangli at gmail dot com 2012-01-10 18:07 ` oleg at smolsky dot net 2012-01-11 9:43 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-11 17:27 ` xinliangli at gmail dot com 2012-03-02 0:56 ` oleg at smolsky dot net 2012-03-02 8:08 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02 8:23 ` oleg at smolsky dot net 2012-03-02 8:29 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2012-03-02 9:14 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-03 2:20 ` oleg at smolsky dot net 2012-03-03 2:47 ` oleg at smolsky dot net 2012-03-03 3:00 ` oleg at smolsky dot net 2012-03-06 16:34 ` oleg at smolsky dot net 2012-03-06 17:27 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-06 19:40 ` oleg at smolsky dot net
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-50182-4-veM6YfpF3q@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: linkBe 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).