------- Comment #47 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-10 11:42 -------
Re. comment #37:
Mark, bug 38453 has a simple test case that shows the poor optimization choice
for ARM-linux. Also, there are now 4 bugs closed as duplicates of this one, so
many users run into this and consider it important enough an issue to file a
bug report about it.
Re. comment #16:
Zdenek, do you remember which revision / patch removed the cost check? And do
you recall (or can you recover) some of the missed-optimization bug report
numbers? I tried to find them with a Bugzilla query, but failed.
With the removal of the cost check, we've gone from missed-optimization bugs to
too-aggressive-optimization bugs that even require hacks/workarounds from our
users. To me, it seems we have made the wrong trade-off, then.
In my opinion, this *is* an optimizer bug, and, actually, a much more important
bug than some of the regressions that are P2/P3 now for gcc 4.3 and gcc 4.4.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed|2007-05-23 15:13:15 |2008-12-10 11:42:50
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32044
