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: New loop unroller broken?

From: Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>
To: Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz>
Cc: Ulrich Weigand <weigand at i1 dot informatik dot uni-erlangen dot de>, Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>, Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>, gcc mailing list <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 11:48:24 -0800
Subject: Re: New loop unroller broken?
References: <200401221847.TAA04312@faui1d.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <36C99D46-4D0C-11D8-83FB-000393A6D2F2@physics.uc.edu> <20040122194127.GC16240@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>

On Jan 22, 2004, at 11:41 AM, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:

Zdenek do you know where the problem is and how to fix it for 3.4
no (well, yes, but not with the patch acceptable in this stage).

Why not? This is a performance regression on at least one major target.

and
3.5?
I would definitely like to do something with this in 3.5; if everything goes as I plan, I should have a new doloop pass that will be possible to run after unrolling ready in about two weeks.

I'm happy to hear this!

Follow-Ups:
- Re: New loop unroller broken?
  - From: Zdenek Dvorak

References:
- New loop unroller broken?
  - From: Ulrich Weigand
- Re: New loop unroller broken?
  - From: Andrew Pinski
- Re: New loop unroller broken?
  - From: Zdenek Dvorak

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