This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
AW: gcc 3.0 produces worser code on Ultrasparc
- To: "Jakub Jelinek" <jakub at redhat dot com>, "Bernd Schmidt" <bernds at redhat dot com>
- Subject: AW: gcc 3.0 produces worser code on Ultrasparc
- From: "Heiko Wengler" <Heiko dot Wengler at do dot isst dot fhg dot de>
- Date: 3 Jul 2001 09:08:31 +0200
- Cc: "Alexandre Oliva" <aoliva at redhat dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Hi!
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:jakub@redhat.com]
> Gesendet: Monday, July 02, 2001 9:01 PM
> An: Bernd Schmidt
> Cc: Alexandre Oliva; Heiko Wengler; gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Betreff: Re: gcc 3.0 produces worser code on Ultrasparc
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 07:34:26PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> > On 2 Jul 2001, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> > >
> > > Just like GCC 2.95.3, GCC 3.0 doesn't fully support
> -mcpu=ultrasparc,
> > > so all bets are off.
> >
> > What are the problems?
>
> I'm not aware of any (what is not fully supported is -m64,
> not -mcpu=ultrasparc).
> It would be interesting to know what "worse" means (by 1%,
> 10%, more?), on
50% worser.
> what kind of code and if possible some sample code which
> shows that up.
simple numeric code.
Heiko
PS: i send you the short code.