https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20211
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|steven at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20211
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||sh*-*-*
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20211
Bug 20211 depends on bug 19078, which changed state.
Bug 19078 Summary: Poor quality code after loop unrolling.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19078
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #39 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-22 06:04
---
(In reply to comment #38)
> Maybe this issue migrated into PR31849?
Not entirely, PR31849 is tree-optimization, and a lot of auto-increment
opportunities are only visible at the rtl level.
--
http://gcc.gnu.o
--- Comment #38 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-23 23:13 ---
Maybe this issue migrated into PR31849?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20211
--- Comment #37 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-17 20:06
---
No 4.3 pending patch anymore.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Othe
--- Comment #36 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-18 02:03
---
Just removing patch keyword as the patch is no longer applies after the
dataflow branch merge.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #35 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-17 14:47 ---
This should be fixed when the dataflow branch is merged. There is a new pass
there dedicated to generating auto-inc/dec insns. If the pass in
auto-inc-dec.c on the dataflow branch does not fix this issue, a proper
--- Comment #34 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-30 20:04
---
Created an attachment (id=12718)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12718&action=view)
add-on patch
I've found that this patch is also necessary to avoid invalid transformations.
--
http://gc
--- Comment #33 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-15 20:11
---
4.x patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-06/msg01184.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20211
--- Comment #32 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-02 21:50
---
Subject: Bug 20211
Author: amylaar
Date: Wed Nov 2 21:50:22 2005
New Revision: 106401
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=106401
Log:
Belated Makefile.in checkin for:
2005-09-19 J"orn Renneck
--- Additional Comments From amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-19
17:30 ---
Test results for sh-elf-4_1-branch with
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-09/msg01176.html
are:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-09/msg00925.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-09/
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-19
16:54 ---
Subject: Bug 20211
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: sh-elf-4_1-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-19 16:54:05
Modified files:
gcc: Cha
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-19
16:52 ---
Subject: Bug 20211
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: sh-elf-4_1-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-19 16:52:39
Modified files:
gcc/doc: inv
--- Additional Comments From amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-17
19:20 ---
updated patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-05/msg01768.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20211
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-05-12
19:30 ---
Subject: Re: autoincrement generation is poor
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-12
>18:59 ---
>The only change is the f
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-12
18:59 ---
The only change is the following:
before:
bzip2-1.0.2,compress,9408
bzip2-1.0.2,decompress,10604
after:
bzip2-1.0.2,compress,9428
bzip2-1.0.2,decompress,10640
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?
--- Additional Comments From amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-28
19:21 ---
An updated patch is here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-04/msg02898.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20211
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-28
13:42 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> (In reply to comment #9)
> > Mac OS X and darwin works on the G3, just fine.
>
> The Mac OS X tiger system requirements say that it needs built-in firewire.
> This Mac doesn't ha
--- Additional Comments From amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-28
13:36 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Mac OS X and darwin works on the G3, just fine.
The Mac OS X tiger system requirements say that it needs built-in firewire.
This Mac doesn't have firewire. It also came with 32 M
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-27
13:41 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > There are both primary and secondary platforms among the AUTO_INC_DEC
> > targets.
> > So it is probably good to gain some wider test coverage about
--- Additional Comments From amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-27
13:37 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> There are both primary and secondary platforms among the AUTO_INC_DEC
> targets.
> So it is probably good to gain some wider test coverage about the compile-
> time/run-time impa
--- Additional Comments From amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-12
18:06 ---
This code is waiting for review since 1999:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/1999-11n/msg00583.html
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-17
16:37 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> There are both primary and secondary platforms among the AUTO_INC_DEC
> targets.
> So it is probably good to gain some wider test coverage about the compile-
> time/run-time impa
--- Additional Comments From amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-15
18:08 ---
> A patch against 4.0 20050218 is here:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg01612.html
discover_flags_reg also needs to be updated to understand INSNs.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-03-15
02:12 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
>> What is the compile-time impact of this patch on cc-i compilation, the usual
>> C++ testcases, and SPEC? I am sure this is something worthwile to
>> mention for a review.
> Sorr
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-02-28
13:46 ---
Subject: Re: autoincrement generation is poor
giovannibajo at libero dot it wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-02-25
>18:59 ---
>What is the compile-time i
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-26 12:56
---
(Interested because I see this for CRIS too. For CRIS v32, it's even more
interesting, because it has no reg+offset addressing.)
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-02-25
18:59 ---
What is the compile-time impact of this patch on cc-i compilation, the usual
C++ testcases, and SPEC? I am sure this is something worthwile to mention for
a review.
And BTW, out of curiosity, does the new
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
30 matches
Mail list logo
