https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84490
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 43897
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43897&action=edit
r254012 with peeling disabled
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84490
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 43896
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43896&action=edit
r254011 with peeling disabled
The other differences look like RA/scheduling in the end the stack frame in the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84490
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Actually r253993 was just the changelog part, r253975 was the actual change.
>
> So I'm doing r254012 vs r254011 instead.
Base = r254011, Peak = r254012
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84490
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Actually r253993 was just the changelog part, r253975 was the actual change.
So I'm doing r254012 vs r254011 instead.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84490
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
I'll get numbers/profiles for r253992, r253993 and r254012 for -Ofast
-march=haswell.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84490
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
