https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65076
--- Comment #48 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> --- On Tue, 31 Mar 2015, trippels at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65076 > > --- Comment #46 from Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> --- > (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #45) > > > Like Richard wrote in comment 38 it is "phase opt and generate" that > > > regresses > > > > Yes, but is it regression because of one specific pass shown later or is it > > just a cumulative effect of many little slowdown? > > Nothing pops into the eye, so it must be the cumulative effect. Maybe we regressed optimizing GCC itself? (does not bootstrapping but compiling gcc 5 with gcc 4.9 improve things?) Could also that replacing more libiberty htabs with hash_tables (the GCed ones) and replacing pointer-set/map made things slower.
