From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-482678-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 126240 invoked by alias); 3 Apr 2015 18:35:05 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 126156 invoked by uid 55); 3 Apr 2015 18:35:00 -0000
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/65660] [5 Regression] 252.eon regression on bdver2 with -Ofast
Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2015 18:35:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenther at suse dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-65660-4-Va2y9GOCQu@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-65660-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-65660-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2015-04/txt/msg00230.txt.bz2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65660

--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On April 3, 2015 6:22:48 PM GMT+02:00, "hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org"
<gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65660
>
>--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
>Performance seems to be back at Apr 2
>Apr 2, 2015 16:20 UTC
>(Values: Base: 164.gzip: 1562, 175.vpr: 2384, 176.gcc: 2873, 181.mcf:
>3743,
>186.crafty: 2922, 197.parser: 2002, 252.eon: 4144, 255.vortex: 3345,
>256.bzip2:
>2221, 300.twolf: 3269 Peak: , 164.gzip: 1550, 175.vpr: 2402, 176.gcc:
>2838,
>181.mcf: 3810, 186.crafty: 2811, 197.parser: 1918, 252.eon: 4377,
>255.vortex:
>4353, 256.bzip2: 2334, 300.twolf: 3225)
>Apr 2, 2015 07:20 UTC
>(Values: Base: 164.gzip: 1573, 175.vpr: 2144, 176.gcc: 2798, 181.mcf:
>3739,
>186.crafty: 2906, 197.parser: 1990, 252.eon: 3795, 255.vortex: 3100,
>256.bzip2:
>2214, 300.twolf: 3252 Peak: , 164.gzip: 1554, 175.vpr: 2402, 176.gcc:
>2825,
>181.mcf: 3794, 186.crafty: 2804, 197.parser: 1915, 252.eon: 4339,
>255.vortex:
>4350, 256.bzip2: 2344, 300.twolf: 3264)
>
>Not sure what changed in that range

I patched the tester with some workaround.