Re: Optimisation Problem

Thanks Eric Eric Botcazou-3 wrote: > >> But i wanted to try them indivisually. Is there any method to do so? > > The compiler doesn't optimize anything if you don't pass at least -O. > > -- > Eric Botcazou > > -- View this message in context: ht

Re: Optimisation Problem

> But i wanted to try them indivisually. Is there any method to do so? The compiler doesn't optimize anything if you don't pass at least -O. -- Eric Botcazou

Re: Optimisation Problem

rked for me >> for ex. i tried -funroll-loops for code >> for (int i = 0; i < 3; ++i) >> a[i] = i; > > Try -O -funroll-loops. > > -- > Eric Botcazou > > -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Optimisation-Problem-tp31332686

Re: Optimisation Problem

> hello there... i am trying my hands on gcc optimisations options. > i tried e.g. -finline-functions, -funroll-loops and the likes but none > worked for me > for ex. i tried -funroll-loops for code > for (int i = 0; i < 3; ++i) > a[i] = i; Try -O -funroll-loops. -- Eric Botcazou

Optimisation Problem

n't seem to happen. Is this a bug or something? please help me write good test case or suggest some. i am using gcc 4.1.2. tried 5.4.2 also on rhel5 Best Regards -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Optimisation-Problem-tp31332686p31332686.html Sent from the gcc - bugs mail

[Bug middle-end/43003] Bitfield optimisation problem

--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-08 22:36 --- Yep in fact the fix for PR 42898 fixed this one also. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 42898 *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug middle-end/43003] Bitfield optimisation problem

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-08 22:32 --- I think this is an issue with volatile really. Which was just fixed in the last week or so. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43003

[Bug c/43003] New: Bitfield optimisation problem

structure members for a temporary structure (just like what bar() does), but then it does not run the optimizer over the generated sequence. -- Summary: Bitfield optimisation problem Product: gcc Version: 4.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: e

[Bug rtl-optimization/13411] segmentation fault occurs in correct code - optimisation problem at O2

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-05 08:40 --- Mark as a dup of bug 21920. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21920 *** -- What|Removed |Added -

[Bug rtl-optimization/13411] segmentation fault occurs in correct code - optimisation problem at O2

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-05 08:39 --- Reopening to ... -- What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCO

[Bug rtl-optimization/21617] CRC64 algorithm optimisation problem on Intel 32-bit

-- What|Removed |Added CC||pluto at agmk dot net http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21617

[Bug rtl-optimization/21617] CRC64 algorithm optimisation problem on Intel 32-bit

--- Additional Comments From m dot cave-ayland at webbased dot co dot uk 2005-05-17 10:31 --- Created an attachment (id=8910) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8910&action=view) The crctest64 .c file mentioned, along with the .i and .s files -- http://gcc.gnu.org/b

[Bug rtl-optimization/21617] New: CRC64 algorithm optimisation problem on Intel 32-bit

llowing options: gcc -O1 crctest64.c -o crctest64-o1 gcc -O2 crctest64.c -o crctest64-o2 Comparison of the timings will show that the second version is at least 100% slower than the first. Many thanks, Mark. -- Summary: CRC64 algorithm optimisation problem on Intel 32-bit Produc