[Bug tree-optimization/54497] [4.8 Regression] Revision 190015 causes 22% degradation on 172.mgrid on PowerPC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54497 Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-16 13:21:38 UTC --- It is indeed problem with dependnecy analysis as discussed in PR55334. I am marking this one as a dup because the other one has some more analysis in it. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 55334 ***
[Bug tree-optimization/54497] [4.8 Regression] Revision 190015 causes 22% degradation on 172.mgrid on PowerPC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54497 Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-06 17:04:00 UTC --- The profile should not be affected by clonning. We do not re-run the estimation and simply use what was there before...
[Bug tree-optimization/54497] [4.8 Regression] Revision 190015 causes 22% degradation on 172.mgrid on PowerPC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54497 Pat Haugen pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #28135|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #4 from Pat Haugen pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-21 21:54:47 UTC --- Created attachment 28246 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28246 Further reduced testcase Further reduced testcase that only has one predictive commoning candidate in the RESID() loop.
[Bug tree-optimization/54497] [4.8 Regression] Revision 190015 causes 22% degradation on 172.mgrid on PowerPC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54497 David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-12 15:29:26 UTC --- Please make sure to add a testcase to the testsuite.
[Bug tree-optimization/54497] [4.8 Regression] Revision 190015 causes 22% degradation on 172.mgrid on PowerPC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54497 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0 Summary|Revision 190015 causes 22% |[4.8 Regression] Revision |degradation on 172.mgrid on |190015 causes 22% |PowerPC |degradation on 172.mgrid on ||PowerPC --- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-06 10:01:41 UTC --- I suppose the loop is no longer predicted to execute enough times?
[Bug tree-optimization/54497] [4.8 Regression] Revision 190015 causes 22% degradation on 172.mgrid on PowerPC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54497 --- Comment #2 from Pat Haugen pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-06 21:05:05 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) I suppose the loop is no longer predicted to execute enough times? I don't think that's the issue, I'm thinking it's somewhere in the data dependence analysis. Looking at the dump before .pcom (i.e. .dceloop3), both resid_ and resid_.constprop.0 list BB7, the inner loop block, as freq=1. The .pcom dump has many differences in the data analysis portion between the two procedures, but the main difference is the analysis on resid_.constprop.0 ends with the following: Predictive commoning failed: no suitable chains
