https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96750

--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #2)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> > after:
> > 1794240.0
> > 
> > before:
> > 1802710.0
> 
> That's less than 1% of difference (with "after" better than "before"), not
> the 10% regression claimed, maybe there is another relevant commit?

Sorry, I copied bad numbers:

after:
1806140.0

before:
1705630.0

which is ~6% regression.

Reply via email to