This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: GCC optimizes integer overflow: bug or feature?

From: Robert Dewar <dewar at adacore dot com>
To: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gmail dot com>
Cc: Dave Korn <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>, 'Denis Vlasenko' <vda dot linux at googlemail dot com>, 'Paul Brook' <paul at codesourcery dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, 'Andrew Haley' <aph at redhat dot com>, 'Paolo Bonzini' <bonzini at gnu dot org>, bug-gnulib at gnu dot org
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 12:30:49 -0500
Subject: Re: GCC optimizes integer overflow: bug or feature?
References: <005101c725eb$bce0a650$a501a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM> <1166807835.31053.4.camel@celery.andrew.com>

Andrew Pinski wrote:

On Fri, 2006-12-22 at 17:08 +0000, Dave Korn wrote:
Misaligned accesses *kill* your performance!
Maybe on x86, but on PPC, at least for the (current) Cell's PPU
misaligned accesses for most cases unaligned are optimal.

is that true across cache boundaries?


Thanks,
Andrew Pinski

Follow-Ups:
- Re: GCC optimizes integer overflow: bug or feature?
  - From: Andrew Pinski

References:
- RE: GCC optimizes integer overflow: bug or feature?
  - From: Dave Korn
- RE: GCC optimizes integer overflow: bug or feature?
  - From: Andrew Pinski

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]