On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Sebastian Pop <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > Steve Ellcey wrote: >> I understand the desire not to add optimizations just for benchmarks but >> we do know other compilers have added this optimization for coremark >> (See >> http://community.arm.com/groups/embedded/blog/2013/02/21/coremark-and-compiler-performance) >> and the 13 people on the CC list for this bug certainly shows interest in >> having it even if it is just for a benchmark. Does 'competing against other >> compilers' sound better then 'optimizing for a benchmark'? > > I definitely would like to see GCC trunk do this transform. What about we > integrate the new pass, and then when jump-threading manages to catch the > coremark loop, we remove the pass?
It never worked that way. A new pass takes compile-time, if we disable it by default it won't help coremark (and it will bitrot quickly). So - please fix DOM instead. Richard. > Thanks, > Sebastian
