From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22647 invoked by alias); 22 Jun 2012 23:05:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 22630 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Jun 2012 23:05:53 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.3 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, 22 Jun 2012 23:05:40 +0000 From: "hubicka at ucw dot cz" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/53726] [4.8 Regression] aes test performance drop for eembc_2_0_peak_32 Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 23:05:00 -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: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: hubicka at ucw dot cz X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned 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: 2012-06/txt/msg01548.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53726 --- Comment #23 from Jan Hubicka 2012-06-22 23:04:21 UTC --- > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53726 > > --- Comment #22 from Jan Hubicka 2012-06-22 22:45:35 UTC --- > > Yes. The question is what is "very small" and how can we possibly > > As what is very small is defined in the i386.c in the cost tables. > I simply run a small benchmark testing library&GCC implementations to > fill it in. With new glibcs these tables may need upating. I updated them > on some to make glibc in SUSE 11.x. > > PR 43052 is about memcmp. Memcpy/memset should behave more or less sanely. > (that also reminds me that I should look again at the SSE memcpy/memset > implementation for 4.8) That also reminds me that this tunning was mostly reverted with the SSE work. I will look into that patches and push out the safe bits for 4.8 Honza