--- Comment #28 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-06 11:20
---
GCC 4.5.0 is being released. Deferring to 4.5.1.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Last reconfirmed|2010-03-29 17:28:22 |2010-03-31
--- Comment #26 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-28 15:50
---
ppc folks, can you re-confirm this bug again? There have been some register
allocation changes meanwhile.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #24 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 13:14
---
ppc folks, can you re-confirm this bug?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39976
--- Comment #25 from pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 21:29
---
I am still seeing the 2-block loop using revision 154838, both 32 and 64 bit,
compile options -O3 -mcpu=power6 -funroll-loops.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39976
--- Comment #23 from pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-23 23:48
---
I opened a new bugzilla, 40482, for the Load-hit-store RA issue discussed in
comments 17-20 since that's a separate problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39976
--- Comment #22 from pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-14 21:15
---
The original problem, multi-block loop preventing movement of loads, was
reintroduced with revision 149206, Jan's CD-DCE patch to remove empty loops.
--
pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #21 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-09 10:43 ---
I fear this is no expand-from-SSA problem anymore, but rather an IRA problem.
Unassigning and CCing Vlad.
--
matz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #19 from luisgpm at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com 2009-06-03
03:01 ---
A little bit of information about the problem.
On 32-bit code, the loads are being pushed up, from a different BB to the BB
where we have the stfd instruction, during global scheduling. I suspect the
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Priority|P3
--
pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #17 from luisgpm at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com 2009-05-15
02:16 ---
Actually, 64-bit is affected too, but not with the power6x tuning i was
using. With -mcpu=power6 i can reproduce the problem.
The problem seems to be a couple load instructions that are being pushed up
--- Comment #18 from luisgpm at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com 2009-05-15
02:19 ---
64-bit with -mcpu=power6
.L93:
fmul 20,11,13
fmul 19,11,0
addis 12,11,0xffe5
lfd 3,0(11)
addi 5,11,8
lfd 2,9472(12)
addis 14,5,0xffe5
--- Comment #14 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-13 18:16 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-05/msg00753.html should fix it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39976
--- Comment #15 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-13 20:14 ---
Subject: Bug 39976
Author: matz
Date: Wed May 13 20:14:44 2009
New Revision: 147494
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=147494
Log:
PR middle-end/39976
* tree-outof-ssa.c
--- Comment #16 from luisgpm at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com 2009-05-14
04:12 ---
Just for the record... The 64-bit case is fixed. There are still performance
issues in the 32-bit case.
I'll attach more information soon.
Luis
--
--- Comment #11 from luisgpm at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com 2009-05-12
12:55 ---
Any updates?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39976
--- Comment #12 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-12 13:37 ---
The problem is that for PHI node expansion something has to be inserted on
the backedge of a single BB loop, splitting it into two BBs (where one just
contains one instruction). Something in the RTL passes then moves
--- Comment #13 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-12 15:29
---
(In reply to comment #12)
I'm working on a fix. Earlier compilers contained a hack for this (because
swing modulo scheduling can only deal with single BB loops),
It was not just SMS which only can deal with
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39976
--- Comment #8 from luisgpm at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com 2009-05-04
15:41 ---
Oops... forgot about that bit, sorry.
Compile flags: -m32 -O3 -mcpu=power[4|5|6] -ffast-math -ftree-loop-linear
-funroll-loops -fpeel-loops
This reproduces on both 32-bit and 64-bit.
Luis
--
--- Comment #9 from luisgpm at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com 2009-05-04
15:50 ---
Follows the configure options, although i think you'll be able to reproduce it
with the flags i've mentioned.
/gcc/HEAD/configure --target=powerpc64-linux --host=powerpc64-linux
--build=powerpc64-linux
--- Comment #7 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-04 14:37 ---
Compile options please. I can't reproduce it with a powerpc64 compiler
with -O2, neither with -m32 nor -m64, -ffast-math or no -ffast-math.
Also 'gcc -v' can't hurt to make sure our compilers are configured the same.
--- Comment #10 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-04 16:10 ---
Yes, I can now, thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39976
--- Comment #6 from luisgpm at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com 2009-05-04
13:50 ---
Just for the sake of information, -fselective-scheduling doesn't help.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39976
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-01 20:07 ---
bb 45:
# crkveuk_lsm.686_3635 = PHI crkveuk_lsm.686_517(44)
# cikve_lsm.685_3640 = PHI cikve_lsm.685_528(44)
# crkveuk_lsm.686_3564 = PHI crkveuk_lsm.686_517(44)
Interesting, I wonder if that causes
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #1 from luisgpm at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com 2009-04-30
19:29 ---
ASM code for the bad loop
.L145:
fmul 10,8,13
fmul 5,8,0
addis 3,4,0xffe5
lfd 22,8(7)
addi 7,4,8
lfd 6,9472(3)
fmadd 10,9,0,10
fmsub
--- Comment #2 from luisgpm at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com 2009-04-30
19:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=17786)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17786action=view)
Last tree pass for the bad code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39976
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-30 19:51 ---
bb 45:
# crkveuk_lsm.686_3635 = PHI crkveuk_lsm.686_517(44)
# cikve_lsm.685_3640 = PHI cikve_lsm.685_528(44)
# crkveuk_lsm.686_3564 = PHI crkveuk_lsm.686_517(44)
Interesting, I wonder if that causes expand
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-04-30 20:17 ---
I am not sure if it is related. Revision 146817 miscompiled 465.tonto in
SPEC CPU 2006 on Linux/ia32 with
-O3 -msse2 -mfpmath=sse -ffast-math -funroll-loops -m32
The resulting tonto binary generated the wrong
31 matches
Mail list logo
