https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69347
--- Comment #8 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
There is still a big difference between gcc-5 and trunk for this testcase:
gcc-5:
...
TOTAL : 27.97 1.2129.21
213855 kB
gcc-6:
...
tree VRP
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69347
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69347
--- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Tue Jan 19 23:03:26 2016
New Revision: 232593
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232593&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/69347
* tree-ssa-threadbackwards.c
(f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69347
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
So the most glaring problem is that we're trying awful hard to find jump
threads that ultimately we're going to have to throw away anyway.
We're being asked to find jump threads to determine a constant valu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69347
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
We've got function with something like 15k blocks. One particular block as ~3k
predecessors. Clearly something in the FSM bits isn't scaling. I've already
fixed one bug in this space a few months ago and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69347
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Manual git-bisect on gcc112 points to the same revision: r228739.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69347
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69347
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69347
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69347
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
10 matches
Mail list logo