This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Measuring gcc optimizations: are they well balanced?
- To: hubicka at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz (Jan Hubicka)
- Subject: Re: Measuring gcc optimizations: are they well balanced?
- From: Andi Kleen <ak at muc dot de>
- Date: 09 Jan 2000 16:24:12 +0100
- cc: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <20000109145709.A23937@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
Hallo Jan,
hubicka@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz (Jan Hubicka) writes:
>
> i=0
> while (i < TOP-1)
> table[i] = table[i+1];
>
> so please next time try to avoid such simple mistakes.
> I've tried to reproduce your problem with current version of gcc using
> following loop:
His original version did have the i++ (at least in the version I saved).
I think the interesting point is that it is not clear if the bug is fixed.
It seems to be covered by another optimization, but would it generate
correct code if the loop cannot be converted to down counting for some
reason?
Also IMHO the bug is quite serious to have in a release compiler
like gcc 2.95.2, and it would be nice if there was a small standalone
that could be applied if needed and hopefully be put into 2.95.3 if it
should ever be released.
-Andi
--
This is like TV. I don't like TV.