[Bug target/64036] [SH] Evaluate re-enabling scheduling before RA

2024-10-13 Thread olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64036 Oleg Endo changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-10-14 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/64036] [SH] Evaluate re-enabling scheduling before RA

2015-07-25 Thread olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64036 --- Comment #6 from Oleg Endo --- For this test case static volatile int* const g_0 = (volatile int*)0x1240; static volatile int* const g_1 = (volatile int*)0x1244; static volatile int* const g_2 = (volatile int*)0x1248; static volatile int* con

[Bug target/64036] [SH] Evaluate re-enabling scheduling before RA

2015-07-07 Thread kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64036 --- Comment #5 from Kazumoto Kojima --- (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #3) > else if (flag_exceptions) > { > if (flag_schedule_insns && global_options_set.x_flag_schedule_insns) > warning (0, "ignoring -fschedul

[Bug target/64036] [SH] Evaluate re-enabling scheduling before RA

2015-07-07 Thread olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64036 --- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo --- (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #2) > An example function, compiling with -O2 -m4: > > int test_0 (unsigned short* x, int y, int z) > { > return > (x[0] + x[1] + x[2] + x[3] + x[4] + x[5] + x[6] >

[Bug target/64036] [SH] Evaluate re-enabling scheduling before RA

2015-07-07 Thread olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64036 --- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo --- I've just tried the following example on the AMS branch: float fun (float* x) { return x[0] + x[1] + x[2] + x[3]; } no AMS: mov r4,r1 add #4,r1 fmov.s @r4,fr0 fmov.s

[Bug target/64036] [SH] Evaluate re-enabling scheduling before RA

2014-12-21 Thread olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64036 --- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo --- An example function, compiling with -O2 -m4: int test_0 (unsigned short* x, int y, int z) { return (x[0] + x[1] + x[2] + x[3] + x[4] + x[5] + x[6] + x[7] + x[8] + x[9] + x[10]) ? y : z; } Wit

[Bug target/64036] [SH] Evaluate re-enabling scheduling before RA

2014-12-21 Thread olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64036 --- Comment #1 from Oleg Endo --- In PR 22553 c#23 Kaz posted some CSiBE numbers to compare sched1 and no-sched1: CSiBE with -O2) test namesched1 no-sched1 sched1/no-sched1 bzip2-1.0.2 bzip2.d11.06 10.8067 1.