This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Loop unroll fixes
- To: Jim Wilson <wilson at cygnus dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Subject: Re: Loop unroll fixes
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 20:51:50 -0700
- cc: Bernd Schmidt <bernds at redhat dot com>, "Franz dot Sirl-kernel at lauterbach dot com" <Franz dot Sirl-kernel at lauterbach dot com>, "hzoli at hzoli dot 2y dot net" <hzoli at hzoli dot 2y dot net>
> There are three testcases for Zoltan's 3 patches. Two of these testcases
> are not regressions. They fail at -O2 -funroll-loops in both gcc-2.95.2
> and gcc-3.0.1. The bugs should be fixed in mainline of course, but I see
> no critical need to include them in gcc 3.0.2.
Thank you for your analysis. I agree: only the regression needs to be
fixed in 3.0.2.
> enough, to be included in gcc-3.0.2. I am willing to approve this patch
> for mainline and gcc-3.0.2. This is the patch in
Great. Would you mind applying it?
> I need to spend more time looking at the other two patches. If we still
> want these patches in gcc-3.0.2, then the review will take longer than if
> putting them in mainline is OK, since I need to be more careful with
> patches for gcc-3.0.2.
We don't need them in 3.0.2.
> PS The testcase from Franz Sirl is a regressison at -O2, and hence is a
> more important problem than any of the 3 testcases from Zoltan which all
> require -O2 -funroll-loops to trigger.
Yes, I agree.
Mark Mitchell email@example.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com