This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [3.1.1] Re: GCC performance regression - its memset!
- From: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>, Michel LESPINASSE <walken at zoy dot org>,Roger Sayle <roger at eyesopen dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org,Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org,mark at codesourcery dot org
- Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 10:57:37 +0200
- Subject: Re: [3.1.1] Re: GCC performance regression - its memset!
- References: <Pine.LNX.email@example.com> <20020423060709.GA21922@zoy.org> <20020423095145.GD27274@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20020520144839.GY29339@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20020520185835.P11265@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz>
> > Mark,
> > Would this patch be OK for 3.1.1 branch? It fixes serious misscompilation.
> > Not really regression, since extra switch is needed, but that switch seems
> > to be popular.
> Do you consider -O or -O2 a special switch?
> Anyway, could the testcase be commited with the patch too (the bug shows
> up in C too BTW)?
I meant -minline-all-stringops and didn't noticed this reproduce for some
cases of default settings as well..