From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31795 invoked by alias); 12 Mar 2003 19:26:00 -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 31781 invoked by uid 71); 12 Mar 2003 19:26:00 -0000 Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 19:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030312192600.31780.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Steven Bosscher Subject: Re: optimization/2001: [3.2/3.3 regression] Inordinately long compile times in reload CSE regs Reply-To: Steven Bosscher X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00726.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR optimization/2001; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Steven Bosscher To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, lucier@math.purdue.edu, nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Subject: Re: optimization/2001: [3.2/3.3 regression] Inordinately long compile times in reload CSE regs Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:19:45 +0100 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=2001 Brad Lucier wrote: > Perhaps you were testing 3.4, where this is fixed? Or perhaps it requires > a large number of registers before gcc screws up. Here are the times I > now get, first for the 3.3 branch, then for 3.4: Uhm, yes I used 3.4. I got so many gcc versions around now, picked the wrong one. For 3.3, I get: at -O0: TOTAL : 4.66 0.24 6.14 at -O2: TOTAL : 316.67 1.71 329.12 Ouch. > The patch that fixed this for 3.4 was > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2003-02/msg00742.html > > Perhaps it's in the RedHat 3.2 branch, too. Is that a combination of these two patches? http://gcc.gnu.org./ml/gcc-patches/2003-02/msg00858.html http://gcc.gnu.org./ml/gcc-patches/2003-02/msg01254.html rth mentioned 3 patches, but I can only find these two, and one other of which you said it did not apply to your sources. Any clue why this wasn't backported to 3.3? Greetz Steven