[Bug middle-end/81828] Cilkplus performance regression on ARM...

2017-12-04 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81828 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/81828] Cilkplus performance regression on ARM...

2017-09-20 Thread ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81828 Ramana Radhakrishnan changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5

[Bug middle-end/81828] Cilkplus performance regression on ARM...

2017-08-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81828 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- >As 48-core ARM chips have just been announced by Qualcomm, I have been using a 48 core ThunderX which is an ARMv8-a for almost 3 years now :) So don't bring this up really. Cilk+ is deprecated as nobody

[Bug middle-end/81828] Cilkplus performance regression on ARM...

2017-08-11 Thread ejolson at unr dot edu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81828 --- Comment #3 from Eric --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > Note Cilk+ have been deprecated: > https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-7/changes.html As 48-core ARM chips have just been announced by Qualcomm, now seems like the wrong time to be

[Bug middle-end/81828] Cilkplus performance regression on ARM...

2017-08-11 Thread ejolson at unr dot edu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81828 --- Comment #2 from Eric --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > Note Cilk+ have been deprecated: > https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-7/changes.html As 48-core ARM chips have just been announced by Qualcomm, now seems like the wrong time to be

[Bug middle-end/81828] Cilkplus performance regression on ARM...

2017-08-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81828 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization