[Bug tree-optimization/18463] [4.0 Regression] suboptimal use of fancy x86 addressing modes

2007-01-17 Thread gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #30 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-18 03:09 --- Fixed in GCC-4.1.0. Not to be fixed in GCC-4.0.x -- gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/18463] [4.0 Regression] suboptimal use of fancy x86 addressing modes

2006-03-10 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.0.3 |4.0.4 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18463

[Bug tree-optimization/18463] [4.0 Regression] suboptimal use of fancy x86 addressing modes

2005-09-27 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.0.2 |4.0.3 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18463

[Bug tree-optimization/18463] [4.0 Regression] suboptimal use of fancy x86 addressing modes

2005-09-20 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-20 07:09 --- Subject: Bug 18463 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-20 07:09:22 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog tree-chrec.c tree-chrec.h

[Bug tree-optimization/18463] [4.0 Regression] suboptimal use of fancy x86 addressing modes

2005-09-19 Thread rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-19 15:19 --- Another patch that improves the code on i686: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-09/msg01159.html (with -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer:) .L4: movl(%ebp,%edx,4), %eax movl

[Bug tree-optimization/18463] [4.0 Regression] suboptimal use of fancy x86 addressing modes

2005-09-14 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-14 08:21 --- (From update of attachment 7541) Already in mainline -- What|Removed |Added Attachment #7541

[Bug tree-optimization/18463] [4.0 Regression] suboptimal use of fancy x86 addressing modes

2005-09-14 Thread rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-14 11:04 --- Auch; that patch is actually a very bad idea. Pretending that complex addressing modes are cheaper, when they are not, is just confusing. If there are optimizers that indeed want to prefer complex

[Bug tree-optimization/18463] [4.0 Regression] suboptimal use of fancy x86 addressing modes

2005-09-14 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-14 12:22 --- It looks like it is just following existing practice? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18463

[Bug tree-optimization/18463] [4.0 Regression] suboptimal use of fancy x86 addressing modes

2005-09-14 Thread rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2005-09-14 12:41 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] suboptimal use of fancy x86 addressing modes It looks like it is just following existing practice? yes, I know. The practice is just wrong, though.

[Bug tree-optimization/18463] [4.0 Regression] suboptimal use of fancy x86 addressing modes

2005-09-13 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-13 18:51 --- This is what we get one the mainline: .L4: movl(%ecx), %eax addl$4, %ecx movl%eax, (%edi,%edx,4) movl(%ebp,%edx,4), %eax movl%eax, (%esi,%edx,4)

[Bug tree-optimization/18463] [4.0 Regression] suboptimal use of fancy x86 addressing modes

2005-01-28 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-29 02:37 --- This problem is bigger than just the int--fp problem of the original bug report. It's basically the same problem, namely a poor choice of addressing modes. -- What|Removed

[Bug tree-optimization/18463] [4.0 Regression] suboptimal use of fancy x86 addressing modes

2005-01-28 Thread tbptbp at gmail dot com
--- Additional Comments From tbptbp at gmail dot com 2005-01-29 03:15 --- Some recent discussion about related symptoms. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-01/msg01667.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18463