https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67463
Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC| |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Hi.
Sorry for waiting for some time. I tested your benchmark, where I had to
disable tcmalloc as I can't link it with GCC 4.9, caused by C++ abi change. I
also enhanced dump output to print total time spent (when function
FCS_PRINT_FINISHED is called):
4.9.4:
Finished in 3.607
Finished in 3.613
Finished in 3.621
Finished in 3.662
5.4.0:
Finished in 3.643
Finished in 3.636
Finished in 3.630
Finished in 3.708
6.3.0:
Finished in 3.618
Finished in 3.618
Finished in 3.627
Finished in 3.652
Tested on my desktop machine with Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4770 CPU @ 3.40GHz.
That mentioned, I cannot see the regression, all numbers look within noise
level.
The regression you reported is very small (~3%) and it would be very hard to
compare generated assembly to find different decisions made by GCC. Please try
to
test GCC 6 and possible GCC 7 (which will be released in couple of weeks) and
if seen
a significant regress, please reopen the issue.
