On Sat, 30 Dec 2023, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On Sat, 30 Dec 2023, 01:41 Hans-Peter Nilsson, <h...@bitrange.com> wrote: > > Or perhaps the cause is known? > > Not to me. It probably is a target codegen bug, since all this test really > does is emulate a wide integer type using masks and shifts.
If so, a generic code-generator bug. I've repeated the 5x performance regression observation for a native build and updated PR113175 (.32 vs 1.73 seconds). I'll see if I can quickly find out whether it's codegen or libstdc++. I set it the PR to the latter for the moment. > > With this, the test successfully completes in ~34 seconds. > > > > Ok to commit? > > > > Looks OK to me, but Patrick wrote this test so please wait for him to > confirm. I think this just reduces the number of cases tested, but doesn't > miss any important edge cases that should be checked. Understood: holding, but will ping after the usual week. Thanks for the review! brgds, H-P
