From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-prs-return-28142-listarch-gcc-prs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 5545 invoked by alias); 22 Jan 2003 02:06:01 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-prs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 5503 invoked by uid 71); 22 Jan 2003 02:06:00 -0000
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 02:06:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20030122020600.5502.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
To: ebotcazou@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
From: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: optimization/9319: slower code generated for simple loop on linux
Reply-To: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg01181.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-prs.sourceware.org>

The following reply was made to PR optimization/9319; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
To: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr>
Cc: Amnon Cohen <amnon_cohen@yahoo.com>, gcc-bugs@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: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 18:05:43 -0800

 On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 12:09:52AM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
 > Would you support relaxing the code when unrolling is disabled, in order to 
 > recover the optimization loss in that case ?
 
 No.  The notes used by loop.c would still be in the wrong place.  
 
 
 r~