[Bug rtl-optimization/55845] 454.calculix miscompares with -march=btver2 -O3 -ffastmath -fschedule-insns -mvzeroupper for test data run

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55845 --- Comment #3 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2013-01-04 06:40:44 UTC --- The test fails corei7-avx also. I build a simple reproducer. - #include #define N 100 double foo (

[Bug regression/54390] [AVX] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-tree-sra-bb-slp-pr50730.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54390 Vladimir Yakovlev changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vbyakovl23 at gmail dot com

[Bug lto/55660] New: ICE instead of some warning during lto build

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55660 Bug #: 55660 Summary: ICE instead of some warning during lto build Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prio

[Bug target/54342] OImode is used for _m256 types when using unions in a function call.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54342 Vladimir Yakovlev changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/54985] Dom optimization erroneous remove conditional goto.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54985 --- Comment #2 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-10-19 10:59:15 UTC --- Created attachment 28490 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28490 Main routine

[Bug middle-end/54985] Dom optimization erroneous remove conditional goto.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54985 --- Comment #1 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-10-19 10:58:26 UTC --- Created attachment 28489 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28489 Test case

[Bug middle-end/54985] New: Dom optimization erroneous remove conditional goto.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54985 Bug #: 54985 Summary: Dom optimization erroneous remove conditional goto. Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/54901] [4.8 Regression] air.f90, aermod.f90, and mdbx.f90 are miscompiled with '-m64 -O3 -funroll-loops -fwhole-program' after revision 192213

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54901 Vladimir Yakovlev changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vbyakovl23 at gmail dot com

[Bug target/47440] Use LCM for vzeroupper insertion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47440 --- Comment #4 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-08-23 19:15:58 UTC --- As recomended Uros, I splitted up the patch by two part. First, middle end part is here http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-08/msg01590.html

[Bug target/47440] Use LCM for vzeroupper insertion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47440 Vladimir Yakovlev changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #3 from Vladimir

[Bug rtl-optimization/54342] [4.8 Regression] Wrong mode of call argument

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54342 --- Comment #3 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-08-21 11:18:39 UTC --- I'm working on vzeroupper insertion and my implementation inserts vzeroupper before the call because VALID_AVX256_REG_MODE returns false.

[Bug rtl-optimization/54342] New: [4.8 Regression] Wrong mode of call argument

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54342 Bug #: 54342 Summary: [4.8 Regression] Wrong mode of call argument Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug middle-end/53616] [4.8 Regression] 416.gamess in SPEC CPU 2006 miscompiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53616 --- Comment #15 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-07-24 15:36:16 UTC --- 416.games is passed now.

[Bug middle-end/53616] [4.8 Regression] 416.gamess in SPEC CPU 2006 miscompiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53616 Vladimir Yakovlev changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vbyakovl23 at gmail dot com

[Bug middle-end/53616] [4.8 Regression] 416.gamess in SPEC CPU 2006 miscompiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53616 --- Comment #10 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-07-23 12:48:59 UTC --- Created attachment 27858 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27858 Reduced test case

[Bug tree-optimization/53726] [4.8 Regression] aes test performance drop for eembc_2_0_peak_32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53726 --- Comment #19 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-06-21 12:46:11 UTC --- (In reply to comment #13) > (In reply to comment #10) > > I've tried without static. Runtimes is still the same. > > It doesn't match what I saw. On Atom D510: > > /export/gnu/

[Bug tree-optimization/53726] [4.8 Regression] aes test performance drop for eembc_2_0_peak_32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53726 --- Comment #10 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-06-20 14:34:32 UTC --- I've tried without static. Runtimes is still the same.

[Bug tree-optimization/53726] [4.8 Regression] aes test performance drop for eembc_2_0_peak_32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53726 --- Comment #4 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-06-20 10:50:28 UTC --- Created attachment 27664 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27664 Executable test case

[Bug tree-optimization/53726] [4.8 Regression] aes test performance drop for eembc_2_0_peak_32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53726 --- Comment #3 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-06-20 10:48:11 UTC --- I added executable testcase. Command line to compile gcc -g -ansi -O3 -ffast-math -msse2 -mfpmath=sse -m32 -static -march=corei7 -mtune=corei7 test.c m.c Run results Wed Jun

[Bug c/53726] [4.8 Regression] aes test performance drop for eembc_2_0_peak_32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53726 --- Comment #1 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-06-20 06:13:26 UTC --- Created attachment 27658 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27658 Test case and assemblers

[Bug c/53726] New: [4.8 Regression] aes test performance drop for eembc_2_0_peak_32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53726 Bug #: 53726 Summary: [4.8 Regression] aes test performance drop for eembc_2_0_peak_32 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/52632] GCC compfail on O0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52632 --- Comment #2 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-03-20 10:03:47 UTC --- Created attachment 26929 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26929 Test case

[Bug c/52632] New: GCC compfail on O0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52632 Bug #: 52632 Summary: GCC compfail on O0 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component

[Bug middle-end/52580] [4.8 Regression] 171.swim performance drop on x86 – vectorization doesn’t happen anymore

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52580 --- Comment #6 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-03-15 12:53:50 UTC --- I checked the fix gives 21% acceleration of 171.swim on Sundy Bridge. Thanks.

[Bug fortran/52580] New: [4.8 Regression] 171.swim performance drop on x86 – vectorization doesn’t happen anymore

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52580 Bug #: 52580 Summary: [4.8 Regression] 171.swim performance drop on x86 – vectorization doesn’t happen anymore Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0

[Bug libstdc++/52241] Performance degradation of 447.dealII on corei7 at spec2006_base32.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241 --- Comment #20 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-02-20 18:04:45 UTC --- (In reply to comment #19) > Nice, so we want Paolo's patch. Out of interest, what are the 447.deal > numbers > when comparing linking against old (pre-Benjamin's commit) libstdc

[Bug c++/52241] Performance degradation of 447.dealII on corei7 at spec2006_base32.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241 --- Comment #18 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-02-20 05:37:32 UTC --- I tested Paolo's patch and got acceleration on 447.dial base: +7.36% peak: +5.97% Also I looked dumps: the new routine 'local_Rb_tree_increment' in inlined now in both

[Bug tree-optimization/52272] [4.7 regression] Performance regresswion of 410.bwaves on x86.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52272 --- Comment #6 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-02-16 14:42:36 UTC --- I've checked. The patch fixes the regression. Thanks.

[Bug c++/52241] Performance degradation of 447.dealII on corei7 at spec2006_base32.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241 --- Comment #5 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-02-16 09:05:49 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > I don't understand what you mean by "inlining", since '_Rb_tree_node_base' is > a > *type* not a function. This is a constructor > Anyway, I don't see

[Bug c++/52241] Performance degradation of 447.dealII on corei7 at spec2006_base32.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241 --- Comment #4 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-02-16 09:00:32 UTC --- Created attachment 26675 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26675 Dump of good case (without -fPIC -DPIC)

[Bug c++/52241] Performance degradation of 447.dealII on corei7 at spec2006_base32.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241 --- Comment #3 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-02-16 08:58:45 UTC --- Created attachment 26674 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26674 Dump of bad case (with -fPIC -DPIC)

[Bug regression/52272] [4.7 regression] Performance regresswion of 410.bwaves on x86.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52272 --- Comment #2 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-02-16 08:17:53 UTC --- Created attachment 26673 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26673 Bad case after commit

[Bug regression/52272] [4.7 regression] Performance regresswion of 410.bwaves on x86.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52272 --- Comment #1 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-02-16 08:16:27 UTC --- Created attachment 26672 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26672 Good case before commit

[Bug regression/52272] New: [4.7 regression] Performance regresswion of 410.bwaves on x86.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52272 Bug #: 52272 Summary: [4.7 regression] Performance regresswion of 410.bwaves on x86. Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/52241] New: Performance degradation of 447.dealII on corei7 at spec2006_base32.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241 Bug #: 52241 Summary: Performance degradation of 447.dealII on corei7 at spec2006_base32. Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRM

[Bug bootstrap/49829] [4.7 Regression] --disable-static --enable-shared regression: cannot find -lstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49829 --- Comment #26 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-02-13 09:59:31 UTC --- We have performance degradation of 447.dealII benchspec 2006.It was happened because there are no inlining a library routine '_Rb_tree_node_base' from libstdc++-v3/src/tree.cc co

[Bug bootstrap/49829] [4.7 Regression] --disable-static --enable-shared regression: cannot find -lstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49829 Vladimir Yakovlev changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vbyakovl23 at gmail dot com

[Bug c/50315] Regreesion on Atom after fix #49958

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50315 --- Comment #2 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2011-09-07 09:33:20 UTC --- Created attachment 25217 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25217 Dump after fix

[Bug c/50315] Regreesion on Atom after fix #49958

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50315 --- Comment #1 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2011-09-07 09:32:11 UTC --- Created attachment 25216 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25216 Dump before fix

[Bug c/50315] New: Regreesion on Atom after fix #49958

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50315 Bug #: 50315 Summary: Regreesion on Atom after fix #49958 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c/50195] New: Linking time eroor with -fast-math -O0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50195 Bug #: 50195 Summary: Linking time eroor with -fast-math -O0 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P