This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@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]

[Bug optimization/12419] [3.3/3.4 Regression] Performace regression: poor optimization of const memory


PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12419



------- Additional Comments From bonzini at gnu dot org  2003-10-06 08:01 -------
This patch

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-02/msg01655.html

was reviewed by rth who suggested an alternative approach:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-04/msg00482.html

> As for Zdenek's proposed prepass patch... I think it would be
> better to not iterate over the entire instruction stream twice.
> We could, for instance, change the return value of purge_addressof_1
> to be three-state, with the new return location indicating that
> we should re-process this insn at the end.


Paolo


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