https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
Bug 19721 depends on bug 20514, which changed state.
Bug 20514 Summary: hoisting of label out of jumptable would take place at cse,
should happen at trees
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20514
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
Bug 19721 depends on bug 19790, which changed state.
Bug 19790 Summary: equality not noticed when signedness differs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19790
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
Bug 19721 depends on bug 72712, which changed state.
Bug 72712 Summary: [7 Regression] Tenfold compile time regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72712
What|Removed |Added
-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
--- Comment #28 from Steven Bosscher ---
(In reply to comment #25)
FWIW this case is handled at the GIMPLE level since at least GCC 4.3.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
--- Comment #27 from Steven Bosscher 2013-05-09
10:39:57 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #26)
> With TARGET_LEGITIMATE_ADDRESS_P rejecting (costly) symbols_refs inside
> memory references, cse_local brings the number of __malloc_av references down
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
--- Comment #26 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2013-05-09 00:32:28 UTC ---
The tree optimizers have become extremely aggressive on constant propagation,
so cse is needed more than ever to undo the damage.
With TARGET_LEGITIMATE_ADDRESS_P rejecting (
--
Bug 19721 depends on bug 23911, which changed state.
Bug 23911 Summary: Failure to propagate constants from a const initializer for
_Complex
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23911
What|Old Value |New Value
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||23911
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||23455
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
--- Additional Comments From paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch
2005-08-17 20:07 ---
Subject: Re: [meta-bug] optimizations that CSE still
catches
>>unsigned outcnt;
>>extern void flush_outbuf(void);
>>
>>void
>>bi_windup(unsigned char *outbuf, unsigned char bi_b
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-08-17 19:31 ---
Subject: Re: [meta-bug] optimizations that CSE still
catches
On Wed, 2005-08-17 at 08:03 +, bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-0
--- Additional Comments From bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-17
08:03 ---
This small testcase is a typical case of the optimizations that CSE path
following catches on PowerPC:
unsigned outcnt;
extern void flush_outbuf(void);
void
bi_windup(unsigned char *outbuf,
--
Bug 19721 depends on bug 16961, which changed state.
Bug 16961 Summary: Poor x86-64 performance with 128bit ints
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16961
What|Old Value |New Value
-
--
Bug 19721 depends on bug 19791, which changed state.
Bug 19791 Summary: [tcb] A constant not fully propagated
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19791
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Additional Comments From bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-26
17:35 ---
Another thing that CSE does is promoting paradoxical subregs to regs. On
PowerPC at least, recursive calls of fold_rtx are almost ineffective except for
this. Such promotion helps because equiv_constant do
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
15:15 ---
It is apparently not possible to convince people that any optimizations
in CSE can be removed, so working on this is pointless for me. See
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-04/msg01498.html.
--
--
Bug 19721 depends on bug 19789, which changed state.
Bug 19789 Summary: tree optimizers do not know that constant global variables
do not change
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19789
What|Old Value |New Value
--
Bug 19721 depends on bug 19659, which changed state.
Bug 19659 Summary: GCC does not remove an "if" statement that never triggers.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19659
What|Old Value |New Value
---
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||20514
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
--
Bug 19721 depends on bug 19788, which changed state.
Bug 19788 Summary: Inconsistent handling of -1.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19788
What|Old Value |New Value
--
Bug 19721 depends on bug 20132, which changed state.
Bug 20132 Summary: Pessimization of induction variable and missed hoisting
opportunity
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20132
What|Old Value |New Value
-
--- Additional Comments From amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-11
19:43 ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> IMHO. One of the tricks with the mult and divmod expanders is precisely
> when should we expand them into their component operations. We clearly
> don't want to do it at the ver
--
Bug 19721 depends on bug 20130, which changed state.
Bug 20130 Summary: Fold a * -1 - 1 into ~a;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20130
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-06
22:14 ---
Just to give people an idea of how close we are to optimizing well enough that
the calls to fold_rtx in CSE are almost all no-ops, here are some numbers
taken over all cc1-i files on amd64:
Number of tim
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-03-06 19:56 ---
Subject: Re: [meta-bug] optimizations that CSE still
catches
On Sun, 2005-03-06 at 09:30 +, stevenb at suse dot de wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From stevenb at suse dot de 2005-03-06 09:30
> --
--- Additional Comments From stevenb at suse dot de 2005-03-06 09:30
---
Subject: Re: [meta-bug] optimizations that CSE still catches
On Sunday 06 March 2005 06:59, law at redhat dot com wrote:
> Ah. Yes. What did it look like in the tree dumps? Unless
> one of the expanders is cre
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-03-06 05:59 ---
Subject: Re: [meta-bug] optimizations that CSE still
catches
On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 10:39 +, stevenb at suse dot de wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From stevenb at suse dot de 2005-03-05 10:39
> --
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-06
00:32 ---
The first case of comment #14 turns out to be PR20130.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
--- Additional Comments From stevenb at suse dot de 2005-03-05 10:39
---
Subject: Re: [meta-bug] optimizations that CSE still catches
> Am I missing something here? I guess I'm not sure what point you're
> trying to make.
It just seems that we could do better on initial RTL generatio
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-03-02 18:23 ---
Subject: Re: [meta-bug] optimizations that CSE still
catches
On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 11:50 +, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-02
11:50 ---
Here is a nice one:
Working on insn:
(insn 215 214 216 15 (parallel [
(set (reg:DI 176)
(ashift:DI (reg:DI 175)
(const_int 3 [0x3])))
(clobb
--
Bug 19721 depends on bug 19938, which changed state.
Bug 19938 Summary: Missed jump threading opportunity due to signedness
difference
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19938
What|Old Value |New Value
--
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||20132
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||20130
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||19938
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06
17:41 ---
Arguably, PR16961 is not directly related. But if we fix that bug and the
similar "long long" issues on 32 bits hosts, then the "64 bits arith on 32
bits hosts" thing should be a non-issue (assuming the tr
--- Additional Comments From hubicka at ucw dot cz 2005-02-02 11:50 ---
Subject: Re: [meta-bug] optimizations that CSE still catches
>
> --- Additional Comments From stevenb at suse dot de 2005-02-02 09:21
> ---
> Subject: Re: [meta-bug] optimizations that CSE still catches
--- Additional Comments From stevenb at suse dot de 2005-02-02 09:21
---
Subject: Re: [meta-bug] optimizations that CSE still catches
On Monday 31 January 2005 22:35, law at redhat dot com wrote:
> Note I would _STRONGLY_ recommend people look at more than just the
> compiler when eval
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-01-31 21:35 ---
Subject: Re: [meta-bug] optimizations that CSE still
catches
On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 20:14 +, stevenb at suse dot de wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From stevenb at suse dot de 2005-01-31 20:14
> --
--- Additional Comments From stevenb at suse dot de 2005-01-31 20:14
---
Subject: Re: [meta-bug] optimizations that CSE still catches
My numbers for not disabling CSE completely but disabling path following
are a lot less pessimistic. This was on an AMD Opteron at 1600MHz:
GCC was co
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-31
15:26 ---
Similarly for em64t.
Build times for SPECint were reduced by 9.2%.
Build times for SPECfp were reduced by 7.5%.
Compiler bootstrap times were reduced by 4.4%.
Comparison between 20050127/spec-20050127.
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-31
15:23 ---
SPEC comparisons for i686 before/after kazu's patch to completely disable CSE.
The 20050127 compiler has CSE enabled. The 20050129 compiler has CSE disabled.
Compile times for SPECint were reduced by 9%.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-01-
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-31
12:42 ---
Created an attachment (id=8112)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8112&action=view)
gcov coverage testing of CVS HEAD 20050131 on AMD64
This is the coverage data of cse.c for 517 preprocess
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||19659
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-31
12:39 ---
To get something started, I have done SPECint and SPECfp runs on AMD64 with CVS
HEAD 20050130, unmodified vs. a cse.c with path following disabled (by setting
the max-cse-path-length to 1). The overall score
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||kazu at cs dot umass dot
||edu, pinskia at gcc dot gnu
48 matches
Mail list logo
