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: Loop unrolling-related SPEC regressions?

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
Cc: Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>, Laurent Guerby <guerby at acm dot org>, Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>, Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at unitus dot it>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 09:31:28 -0800
Subject: Re: Loop unrolling-related SPEC regressions?
References: <3C61A96C.7030604@acm.org> <E2995D70-1B52-11D6-826C-003065C86F94@apple.com> <20020207114645.GH26252@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>

On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:46:45PM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Our setjmp handling should be aggressive enought.  We represent
> it as abnormal edge in the CFG and this optimize the rest of
> function w/o much of degradation.

No we don't.  We _talked_ about doing that.


r~

References:
- Re: Loop unrolling-related SPEC regressions?
  - From: Laurent Guerby
- Re: Loop unrolling-related SPEC regressions?
  - From: Dale Johannesen
- Re: Loop unrolling-related SPEC regressions?
  - From: Jan Hubicka

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