From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31459 invoked by alias); 7 Feb 2002 17:31:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 31360 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2002 17:31:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO potter.sfbay.redhat.com) (209.249.29.60) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 7 Feb 2002 17:31:32 -0000 Received: from dot.sfbay.redhat.com (dot.sfbay.redhat.com [205.180.230.224]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g17HRBP16137; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 09:27:11 -0800 Received: (from rth@localhost) by dot.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g17HVTw28895; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 09:31:29 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: dot.sfbay.redhat.com: rth set sender to rth@redhat.com using -f Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2002 09:42:00 -0000 From: Richard Henderson To: Jan Hubicka Cc: Dale Johannesen , Laurent Guerby , Andreas Jaeger , Paolo Carlini , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Loop unrolling-related SPEC regressions? Message-ID: <20020207093128.A28891@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Richard Henderson , Jan Hubicka , Dale Johannesen , Laurent Guerby , Andreas Jaeger , Paolo Carlini , gcc@gcc.gnu.org References: <3C61A96C.7030604@acm.org> <20020207114645.GH26252@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20020207114645.GH26252@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>; from jh@suse.cz on Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:46:45PM +0100 X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00539.txt.bz2 On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:46:45PM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote: > Our setjmp handling should be aggressive enought. We represent > it as abnormal edge in the CFG and this optimize the rest of > function w/o much of degradation. No we don't. We _talked_ about doing that. r~