------- Comment #18 from anlauf at gmx dot de 2010-01-30 00:01 ------- (In reply to comment #17)
> I tried this one and compared it to the semi-solution in comment #9. > Both "work for me", but the patch from comment #16 appears to produce > a significant performance regression for my code of the order of 10-15% > as compared to the one from #9. My mistake. I had 3 consistent, bad timings, but now it appears that the system was not properly idle. I redid the timings on an now idle system, and performance was back to normal. Sorry for the false alarm! As far as the patch is concerned, I guess that you are on the right track. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42888
