Hi Peter,

I removed copyright update in your original patch and applied it on
gcc 4.4 at revision 133082.  I didn't noticed any serious performance
regressions with SPEC CPU 2000/2006.

Thanks.

H.J.
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 7:46 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 10:32:13AM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
>  > On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 17:08 -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
>  > > HJ,
>  > >
>  > > Given the x86/x86_64 issues with the last indexed load/store patch,
>  > > can you SPEC test this patch to make sure the rtlanal.c change doesn't
>  > > affect you?  Thanks.
>  >
>  > HJ,
>  >
>  > If you get a chance, can you please SPEC test the patch located in:
>  >
>  >     http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-02/msg01442.html
>  >
>  > just to make sure it doesn't have a negative impact on x86/x86_64?
>  > Thanks.
>
>  Hi Peter,
>
>  I can use gcc to compile SPEC CPU now. But your patch won't apply
>
>  patching file rtlanal.c
>  patching file gcse.c
>  Hunk #2 succeeded at 4463 (offset 7 lines).
>  Hunk #4 succeeded at 6120 (offset 7 lines).
>  patching file emit-rtl.c
>  Reversed (or previously applied) patch detected!  Assume -R? [n]
>
>  against revision 133140. Do you have an updated patch?
>
>  Thanks.
>
>  H.J.
>