From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29013 invoked by alias); 18 May 2012 17:55:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 28995 invoked by uid 22791); 18 May 2012 17:55:33 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED 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; Fri, 18 May 2012 17:55:20 +0000 From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/53346] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Bad vectorization in the proc cptrf2 of rnflow.f90 Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 17:56:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.8.0 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: 2012-05/txt/msg01854.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53346 --- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-18 17:54:16 UTC --- (In reply to comment #14) > Compile and execute slow assembly: > real 0m18.170s > user 0m17.907s > sys 0m0.223s > > WTF happened here?! Are conditional moves that bad on x86? The change which uses them more for COND_EXPR was mine but really I think this was a latent bug or a way to say chose conditional move over jumps for some targets.