From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10079 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2003 19:16:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 10065 invoked by uid 71); 16 Jan 2003 19:16:05 -0000 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 19:16:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030116191604.10064.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: ebotcazou@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Eric Botcazou Subject: Re: optimization/9319: slower code generated for simple loop on linux Reply-To: Eric Botcazou X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg01013.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR optimization/9319; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Eric Botcazou To: Amnon Cohen Cc: Richard Henderson , gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: optimization/9319: slower code generated for simple loop on linux Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 20:12:03 +0100 > I have done a few more tests, and it seems > that this is a regression > on all platforms (not just intel) introduced by > gcc3.1 Confirmed. The regression actually started to show up in gcc 3.0.4 (that'= s why=20 I asked you to post the assembly code, I only had the 3.0.4 version on my= =20 system) and has affected all versions since then. > The performance is significantly reduced on intel > linux and on Solaris (I have not sent solaris asm > files, let me know if you need them). So I do > not think that this is architecture related A nasty side-effect of the patch that fixed PR optimization/5076, which w= as=20 foreseen by Richard: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-01/msg02111.h= tml Richard, do you think that the problem is worth looking into or that it i= s a=20 lost cause ? --=20 Eric Botcazou