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: Slowdowns in code generated by GCC>=3.3

From: "Giovanni Bajo" <giovannibajo at libero dot it>
To: "Steven Bosscher" <stevenb at suse dot de>,"Remko Troncon" <remko dot troncon at cs dot kuleuven dot ac dot be>
Cc: <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 18:51:35 +0200
Subject: Re: Slowdowns in code generated by GCC>=3.3
References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0410201758020.32184@bifur.rmki.kfki.hu> <20041020212209.GA8322@cs.kuleuven.ac.be> <03e301c4bc41$a8268790$46b92997@bagio> <200410271830.53895.stevenb@suse.de>

Steven Bosscher wrote:

>>>> OK, then PR 15242 is *NOT* the problem reported by the original
>>>> poster of this thread, because he *does* have a regression when
>>>> compiling his code with 3.3.
>>>
>>> If 'regression' includes performance decrease, then indeed.
>>
>> Can you please file a bug report about this then, if you hadn't
>> already? CC me on the bug report please.
>
> *sigh*
> /me points at thread which mentions PR15242

/me points at the quoted text.

15242 is not a regression, the user is seeing a regression since 3.3. So either
you should mark 15242 as a regression (which I am told it would be incorrect),
or 15242, if related, does not capture the essence of the regression, which
appears (or is unconvered - it does not matter) only for versions above 3.3.

Giovanni Bajo

References:
- Re: Slowdowns in code generated by GCC>=3.3
  - From: Földy Lajos
- Re: Slowdowns in code generated by GCC>=3.3
  - From: Remko Troncon
- Re: Slowdowns in code generated by GCC>=3.3
  - From: Giovanni Bajo
- Re: Slowdowns in code generated by GCC>=3.3
  - From: Steven Bosscher

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