[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-21 Thread chenglulu at loongson dot cn via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 --- Comment #22 from chenglulu --- (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #21) > (In reply to chenglulu from comment #19) > > diff --git a/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.cc > > b/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.cc > > index e7835ae34ae..6a808cb0a5c

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-21 Thread xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 --- Comment #21 from Xi Ruoyao --- (In reply to chenglulu from comment #19) > diff --git a/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.cc > b/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.cc > index e7835ae34ae..6a808cb0a5c 100644 > --- a/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.cc

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-21 Thread chenglulu at loongson dot cn via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 --- Comment #20 from chenglulu --- (In reply to chenglulu from comment #19) > diff --git a/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.cc > b/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.cc > index e7835ae34ae..6a808cb0a5c 100644 > --- a/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.cc

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-21 Thread chenglulu at loongson dot cn via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 --- Comment #19 from chenglulu --- diff --git a/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.cc b/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.cc index e7835ae34ae..6a808cb0a5c 100644 --- a/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.cc +++ b/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.cc @@

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-14 Thread chenglulu at loongson dot cn via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 --- Comment #18 from chenglulu --- (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #17) > Strangely PR114074 is a wrong-code (instead of missed-optimization) and > reverting its fix seems improving performance for other targets... This is very strange. I

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-14 Thread xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 Xi Ruoyao changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection |missed-optimization --- Comment #17 from

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-14 Thread chenglulu at loongson dot cn via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 --- Comment #16 from chenglulu --- The performance degradation on LoongArch is caused by one commit： commit e0e9499aeffdaca88f0f29334384aa5f710a81a4 (HEAD -> trunk) Author: Richard Biener Date: Tue Mar 19 12:24:08 2024 +0100

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-09 Thread chenglulu at loongson dot cn via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 --- Comment #15 from chenglulu --- (In reply to Chen Chen from comment #14) > (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #13) > > (In reply to Chen Chen from comment #12) > > > > > No. I used system default gcc. > > > > AOSC backports *many* changes

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-09 Thread chz0808 at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 --- Comment #14 from Chen Chen --- (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #13) > (In reply to Chen Chen from comment #12) > > > No. I used system default gcc. > > AOSC backports *many* changes not in upstream GCC 13.2 to their "13.2": >

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-09 Thread xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 --- Comment #13 from Xi Ruoyao --- (In reply to Chen Chen from comment #12) > No. I used system default gcc. AOSC backports *many* changes not in upstream GCC 13.2 to their "13.2":

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-09 Thread chz0808 at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 --- Comment #12 from Chen Chen --- (In reply to chenglulu from comment #11) > (In reply to Chen Chen from comment #0) > > We tested Loongarch64 CPU Loongson 3A6000 with "LA664" architecture in Linux > > operating system AOSC OS 11.4.0 (default

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-09 Thread chenglulu at loongson dot cn via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 --- Comment #11 from chenglulu --- (In reply to Chen Chen from comment #0) > We tested Loongarch64 CPU Loongson 3A6000 with "LA664" architecture in Linux > operating system AOSC OS 11.4.0 (default gcc version is 13.2.0). And we > found the

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-08 Thread chenglulu at loongson dot cn via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 --- Comment #10 from chenglulu --- (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #9) > (In reply to chenglulu from comment #8) > > > diff --git a/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch-def.cc > > b/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch-def.cc > > index

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-08 Thread xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 --- Comment #9 from Xi Ruoyao --- (In reply to chenglulu from comment #8) > diff --git a/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch-def.cc > b/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch-def.cc > index e8c129ce643..f27284cb20a 100644 > ---

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-08 Thread chenglulu at loongson dot cn via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 --- Comment #8 from chenglulu --- (In reply to Chen Chen from comment #0) > We tested Loongarch64 CPU Loongson 3A6000 with "LA664" architecture in Linux > operating system AOSC OS 11.4.0 (default gcc version is 13.2.0). And we > found the

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-08 Thread chz0808 at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 --- Comment #7 from Chen Chen --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6) > https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=471.407.0 > > shows a recent improvement that then regressed again, maybe you have a > similar artifact

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-08 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |14.2 --- Comment #6 from Richard

[Bug target/114978] [14/15 regression] 548.exchange2_r 14%-28% regressions on Loongarch64 after gcc 14 snapshot 20240317

2024-05-07 Thread chenglulu at loongson dot cn via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978 --- Comment #5 from chenglulu --- I will verify it on multiple machines to see if the problem can be reproduced.