From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 65204 invoked by alias); 6 Jan 2017 16:09:11 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 65195 invoked by uid 89); 6 Jan 2017 16:09:11 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-5.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Jan 2017 16:09:10 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF68515561; Fri, 6 Jan 2017 16:09:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-118-153.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.118.153]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v06G98bp003302; Fri, 6 Jan 2017 11:09:09 -0500 Subject: Re: input address reload issue To: Aurelien Buhrig , Segher Boessenkool References: <094e7c3d-fc6c-1b0a-29c3-263cadec25a7@gmail.com> <20170106085051.GI28613@gate.crashing.org> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org From: Jeff Law Message-ID: Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2017 16:09:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-01/txt/msg00043.txt.bz2 On 01/06/2017 03:26 AM, Aurelien Buhrig wrote: > >> Look at the dump file for reload to see where things come from. Also >> everything Jeff said; you really want LRA. > > I will try switching to LRA in a second step, but I think I need first to remove the old cc0... > BTW, in which way the LRA is better than IRA? Is there any benchmarks? I would suggesting moving away from cc0 first. cc0 is an abomination and should have been abolished years ago -- the only reason is many old ports would break and nobody's taken the time to convert them or propose them for deprecation. While we try to keep the cc0-target paths working, they're not exercised all that much and can easily break. jeff