From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25945 invoked by alias); 16 Feb 2015 14:40:51 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 25910 invoked by uid 48); 16 Feb 2015 14:40:48 -0000 From: "ubizjak at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/65078] [5.0 Regression] 4.9 and 5.0 generate more spill-fill in comparison with 4.8.2 Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 14:40:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: ubizjak at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2015-02/txt/msg01764.txt.bz2 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D65078 --- Comment #3 from Uro=C5=A1 Bizjak --- Similar to PR21182 ? As suggested in the above PR, does "-fschedule-insns -fsched-pressure" make= any difference? >>From gcc-bugs-return-477432-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Feb 16 14:43:40 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 17012 invoked by alias); 16 Feb 2015 14:43:40 -0000 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 Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 16981 invoked by uid 48); 16 Feb 2015 14:43:37 -0000 From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/65078] [5.0 Regression] 4.9 and 5.0 generate more spill-fill in comparison with 4.8.2 Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 14:43:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ra X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: keywords cf_gcctarget cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2015-02/txt/msg01765.txt.bz2 Content-length: 547 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65078 Richard Biener changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |ra Target| |i?86-*-* CC| |vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Seems LRA does a very bad job here for some reason.