From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31726 invoked by alias); 20 Sep 2009 01:00:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 31713 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Sep 2009 01:00:09 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from bromo.med.uc.edu (HELO bromo.med.uc.edu) (129.137.3.146) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with SMTP; Sun, 20 Sep 2009 01:00:06 +0000 Received: from bromo.med.uc.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by bromo.med.uc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70094B0060; Sat, 19 Sep 2009 20:59:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from howarth@localhost) by bromo.med.uc.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n8K0xv3j021486; Sat, 19 Sep 2009 20:59:57 -0400 Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 01:00:00 -0000 From: Jack Howarth To: Richard Guenther Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: GCC 4.5 Status Report (2009-09-19) Message-ID: <20090920005957.GA21474@bromo.med.uc.edu> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-09/txt/msg00362.txt.bz2 On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 10:57:38PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > > We've been accumulating quite a number of P1 bugs. Entering Stage 3 > should allow to improve considerably here in a short time. > Richard, Will the graphite code be under strict stage 3 rules or will it have more leeway under stage 3? We still aren't seeing uniform code improvements from graphite in benchmarks yet and it would be a shame to postpone that until gcc 4.6. Jack