[Bug target/56309] -O3 optimizer generates conditional moves instead of compare and branch resulting in almost 2x slower code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56309 --- Comment #21 from Igor Zamyatin 2013-02-15 06:49:53 UTC --- (In reply to comment #18) > Following patch is a big hammer approach to the problem, intended only for > benchmarking > > --cut here-- > Index: common/config/i386/i386-comm

[Bug target/56511] memcpy misses chance to use AVX instructions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56511 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com

[Bug target/56511] memcpy misses chance to use AVX instructions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56511 --- Comment #4 from Igor Zamyatin 2013-03-07 08:52:53 UTC --- Doesn't first argument of memcpy which is called from memcpy_vec have unknown (1byte) alignment? If yes, how PPC managed to produce vector instructions?

[Bug fortran/55362] [4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE with size() on character pointer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55362 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com

[Bug target/56676] unnecesary splitted load when using avx2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56676 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com

[Bug middle-end/56680] New: ICE for spec2K's 178.galgel and 200.sixtrack for x86_64 at O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56680 Bug #: 56680 Summary: ICE for spec2K's 178.galgel and 200.sixtrack for x86_64 at O3 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFI

[Bug c++/34949] Dead code in empty destructors.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34949 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com

[Bug rtl-optimization/56885] ICE: in assign_by_spills, at lra-assigns.c:1268 with -O -fschedule-insns -fselective-scheduling

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56885 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug rtl-optimization/56885] [4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE: in assign_by_spills, at lra-assigns.c:1268 with -O -fschedule-insns -fselective-scheduling

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56885 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ysrumyan at gmail dot com --- C

[Bug lto/57084] New: 483. xalancbmk run fails with -O2 -flto for i686

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57084 Bug #: 57084 Summary: 483. xalancbmk run fails with -O2 -flto for i686 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/57124] New: 254.gap@spec2000 got miscompare after r198413

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57124 Bug #: 57124 Summary: 254.gap@spec2000 got miscompare after r198413 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/57124] 254.gap@spec2000 got miscompare after r198413

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57124 --- Comment #5 from Igor Zamyatin --- Indeed, -fwrapv helps to run 254.gap successfully

[Bug lto/54095] Unnecessary static variable renaming

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54095 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug rtl-optimization/53942] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] unable to find a register to spill in class 'CREG'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53942 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/54200] copyrename generates wrong debuginfo

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54200 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/54200] copyrename generates wrong debuginfo

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54200 --- Comment #11 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-08-13 12:46:48 UTC --- Right! Sorry for the noise...

[Bug debug/53671] [4.8 Regression] Many guality test failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53671 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug debug/53671] [4.8 Regression] Many guality test failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53671 --- Comment #14 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-08-22 11:24:17 UTC --- Thanks!

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

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54390 Bug #: 54390 Summary: [AVX] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-tree-sra-bb-slp-pr50730.c Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/50557] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Register pressure increase after reassociation (x86, 32 bits)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50557 --- Comment #16 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-10-04 11:17:00 UTC --- Seems with LRA code is fast again

[Bug tree-optimization/54889] New: [4.8 Regression] Revision 191983 gives compfail for 465.tonto in SPEC CPU 2006 when use -O3 -mavx

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54889 Bug #: 54889 Summary: [4.8 Regression] Revision 191983 gives compfail for 465.tonto in SPEC CPU 2006 when use -O3 -mavx Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0

[Bug tree-optimization/54889] [4.8 Regression] Revision 191983 gives compfail for 465.tonto in SPEC CPU 2006 when use -O3 -mavx

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54889 --- Comment #2 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-10-11 11:40:39 UTC --- Now I see no compfails on the whole spec test 465

[Bug tree-optimization/54889] [4.8 Regression] Revision 191983 gives compfail for 465.tonto in SPEC CPU 2006 when use -O3 -mavx

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54889 --- Comment #3 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-10-16 11:12:47 UTC --- Jakub, are you going to commit the fix or there are some issues with it?

[Bug tree-optimization/54942] [4.8 Regression] ICE: OOM with -O3 -fno-cse-follow-jumps -funroll-loops

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54942 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com

[Bug rtl-optimization/54944] 400.perlbench fails with segmentation fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54944 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com

[Bug rtl-optimization/54942] [4.8 Regression] ICE: OOM with -O3 -fno-cse-follow-jumps -funroll-loops

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54942 --- Comment #4 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-10-23 08:52:30 UTC --- Does it still happen? I don't see oom now for my test

[Bug rtl-optimization/54472] ICE (spill_failure): unable to find a register to spill in class 'AREG' with -O -fschedule-insns -fselective-scheduling

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54472 --- Comment #6 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-10-24 11:09:49 UTC --- Have you managed to check the patch?

[Bug tree-optimization/55104] [4.8 Regression] ice in inline_call, at ipa-inline-transform.c:269

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55104 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com

[Bug tree-optimization/55006] [4.8 Regression] aermod.f90 is miscompiled with '-m64 -O2 -funroll-loops' after revision 192526

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55006 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com

[Bug tree-optimization/54985] [4.7/4.8 Regression] dom optimization erroneous remove conditional goto.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54985 --- Comment #11 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-10-30 08:32:01 UTC --- Are there any plans to backport this to 4.7?

[Bug lto/57289] New: ICE during 454.calculix compilation with -O3 -flto

: lto Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: izamyatin at gmail dot com CC: mjambor at suse dot cz Target: x86 Happens due to r198821. Fail: lto1: internal compiler error: in propagate_controlled_uses, at ipa-prop.c:2552 0x71753f

[Bug tree-optimization/57337] New: 416.gamess ICE on x86 after r199048

-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: izamyatin at gmail dot com CC: eraman at google dot com Target: x86 gfortran -c -o mp2ddi.fppized.o -O2 -ffast-math -ffixed-form mp2ddi.fppized.f mp2ddi.fppized.f: In function 'pm

[Bug tree-optimization/57349] New: ICE on 253.perlbmk with pgo after r198096

-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: izamyatin at gmail dot com CC: rguenther at suse dot de Target: x86 Output: gcc -c -o perl.o -DSPEC_CPU2000_LP64 -DSPEC_CPU2000_LINUX_I386 -DSPEC_CPU2000_NEED_BOOL -DSPEC_CPU2000_GLIBC22

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/57337] [4.9 Regression] 416.gamess ICE on x86 after r199048

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57337 --- Comment #4 from Igor Zamyatin --- For the record - 191.fma3d from spec2K fails with similar error

[Bug rtl-optimization/57447] New: [4.9 Regression] ICE on 435.gromacs from spec2006 after r199298

Priority: P3 Component: rtl-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: izamyatin at gmail dot com CC: vmakarov at redhat dot com Target: x86_64 Happens only on x86_64 with just "-O2 -ffast-math" flags: co

[Bug c++/57208] Latest chromium compilation fails with enabled LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57208 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug lto/57554] New: [4.9 regression] 176.gcc built with -flto miscompared after r198917 for x86

: normal Priority: P3 Component: lto Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: izamyatin at gmail dot com CC: jh at suse dot cz Target: x86 Note that before r198917 there was compilation fail for this test. Compile flags: -O3

[Bug rtl-optimization/57468] [4.9 Regression] 26% performance drop on important benchmark after r199298.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57468 --- Comment #3 from Igor Zamyatin --- Patch is here http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-06/msg00357.html

[Bug rtl-optimization/57468] [4.9 Regression] 26% performance drop on important benchmark after r199298.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57468 --- Comment #4 from Igor Zamyatin --- So following commit fixed the issue commit 3620f4de1b49b0bfffe5f812b2d259e5c72c5c61 Author: vmakarov Date: Thu Jun 6 21:12:06 2013 + 2013-06-06 Vladimir Makarov PR rtl-optimization/574

[Bug lto/57602] New: Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: lto Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: izamyatin at gmail dot com CC: jh at suse dot cz Target: i686 For instance, 164.gzip has Segmentation fault. (tried on trunk, revision

[Bug lto/57602] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602 --- Comment #2 from Igor Zamyatin --- For both cases we have calls of static routines where address of some static variable is being passed. Since all this could be seen only for 32 bits, problem looks like some attribute which allows the routine

[Bug lto/57602] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at ucw dot cz --- Comment #3 from

[Bug lto/57602] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602 --- Comment #4 from Igor Zamyatin --- Created attachment 30377 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30377&action=edit Untested patch that corrects the cleanup

[Bug lto/57602] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602 --- Comment #6 from Igor Zamyatin --- Jan, have you had a chance to look at the problem?

[Bug lto/57879] GCC with -flto generates invalid code for genmddeps program

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57879 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug lto/58298] [4.9 regression] ICE in mentions_vars_p_field_decl, at lto/lto.c:1392

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58298 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug target/50176] New: [4.6/4.7 Regression] 4.7 generates spill-fill dealing with char->int conversion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50176 Bug #: 50176 Summary: [4.6/4.7 Regression] 4.7 generates spill-fill dealing with char->int conversion Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status:

[Bug target/50176] [4.7 Regression] 4.7 generates spill-fill dealing with char->int conversion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50176 --- Comment #2 from Igor Zamyatin 2011-08-25 13:17:36 UTC --- For gcc with Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Configured with: ../configure --disable-bootstrap --enable-languages=c,c++ --prefix=/export/users/izamyati/gcc_4_6_2_prefix/ Thread model

[Bug target/50176] [4.7 Regression] 4.7 generates spill-fill dealing with char->int conversion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50176 --- Comment #5 from Igor Zamyatin 2011-08-29 11:48:12 UTC --- Yes, looks like this revision is the reason

[Bug target/50176] [4.7 Regression] 4.7 generates spill-fill dealing with char->int conversion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50176 --- Comment #7 from Igor Zamyatin 2011-09-14 14:30:35 UTC --- In RTL everythin is vice-versa, additional instruction appears: For the "bad" case couple instructions are responsible for cb load (asmcons dump): (insn 52 51 53 5 (set (reg:QI 83 [

[Bug target/50176] [4.7 Regression] 4.7 generates spill-fill dealing with char->int conversion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50176 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vmakarov at redhat dot com --- Comment #8

[Bug tree-optimization/50557] New: [4.7 Regression] Register pressure increase after reassociation (x86, 32 bits)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50557 Bug #: 50557 Summary: [4.7 Regression] Register pressure increase after reassociation (x86, 32 bits) Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status:

[Bug tree-optimization/50557] [4.7 Regression] Register pressure increase after reassociation (x86, 32 bits)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50557 --- Comment #1 from Igor Zamyatin 2011-09-28 11:52:18 UTC --- Created attachment 25373 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25373 testcase

[Bug tree-optimization/50557] [4.7 Regression] Register pressure increase after reassociation (x86, 32 bits)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50557 --- Comment #3 from Igor Zamyatin 2011-09-29 08:34:45 UTC --- William, thanks for quick response! With -funroll-loops regression is still present. Do you want me to attach some dumps?

[Bug tree-optimization/50557] [4.7 Regression] Register pressure increase after reassociation (x86, 32 bits)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50557 --- Comment #6 from Igor Zamyatin 2011-10-07 10:33:33 UTC --- Indeed, overall register pressure is not increased. Even before IRA dumps show that register pressure is actually kept on the same level. Looks like it is a tricky case we met. Firs

[Bug target/50164] [IRA, 4.7 Regression] Performance degradation due to increased memory instructions count

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50164 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug rtl-optimization/50898] New: Register allocation depends on function return expression on x86 32-bits

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50898 Bug #: 50898 Summary: Register allocation depends on function return expression on x86 32-bits Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONF

[Bug target/50962] New: Additional opportunity for AGU stall avoidance optimization for Atom processor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50962 Bug #: 50962 Summary: Additional opportunity for AGU stall avoidance optimization for Atom processor Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status:

[Bug target/50962] Additional opportunity for AGU stall avoidance optimization for Atom processor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50962 --- Comment #1 from Igor Zamyatin 2011-11-02 12:00:55 UTC --- Created attachment 25688 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25688 testcase

[Bug tree-optimization/53128] [4.8 Regression] Compiler produces infinite loop on regular O2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53128 --- Comment #4 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-05-03 11:09:15 UTC --- Isn't it too aggressive from user perspective to perform such transformation even without warning? Especially for the case when that "wrong" read is not used later. Sure it is dangerou

[Bug tree-optimization/53128] [4.8 Regression] Compiler produces infinite loop on regular O2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53128 --- Comment #6 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-05-04 13:19:07 UTC --- Compiler does not simply see such code, it happens after some analysis, right? For example, after work of infer_loop_bounds_from_undefined which makes some assumptions and I believe ca

[Bug c++/53209] [4.7/4.8 Regression] tree check ICE: expected tree_vec, have error_mark in comp_template_args_with_info, at cp/pt.c:7038

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53209 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/53161] [4.8 Regression] ICE with weakref function and a function which takes vector types

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53161 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/53161] [4.8 Regression] ICE with weakref function and a function which takes vector types

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53161 --- Comment #7 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-05-11 10:07:07 UTC --- Error message for x86 compilation

[Bug regression/53437] New: FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/inline-params.c -O0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53437 Bug #: 53437 Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/inline-params.c -O0 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority

[Bug bootstrap/53555] [4.8 Regression] Bootstrap failure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53555 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/53588] New: [4.8 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/pr32380.f

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53588 Bug #: 53588 Summary: [4.8 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/pr32380.f Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/53081] memcpy/memset loop recognition

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53081 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/53081] memcpy/memset loop recognition

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53081 --- Comment #16 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-06-20 08:44:44 UTC --- Also cause of http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53726

[Bug bootstrap/53750] New: x86 bootstrap failure since 188876

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53750 Bug #: 53750 Summary: x86 bootstrap failure since 188876 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug bootstrap/53750] x86 bootstrap failure since 188876

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53750 --- Comment #1 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-06-22 10:14:40 UTC --- Oh, I see that fix was already checked in. Great!

[Bug lto/53787] New: Possible lto improvement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53787 Bug #: 53787 Summary: Possible lto improvement Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Com

[Bug lto/53787] Possible lto improvement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53787 --- Comment #2 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-06-27 17:56:48 UTC --- The testcase was reduced from some real app. No inlining happened there. Do you think this testcase is bad?

[Bug lto/53787] Possible lto improvement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53787 --- Comment #4 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-06-28 08:17:13 UTC --- Created attachment 27714 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27714 gfort assembler "Init" routine should be inspected here

[Bug lto/53787] Possible lto improvement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53787 --- Comment #5 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-06-28 08:22:11 UTC --- Created attachment 27715 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27715 ifort assembler "Init" routine looks much better here

[Bug tree-optimization/53787] Possible IPA-SRA / IPA-CP improvement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53787 --- Comment #7 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-07-19 19:09:49 UTC --- Any thoughts here?

[Bug regression/54084] New: Bunch of fails for x86

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54084 Bug #: 54084 Summary: Bunch of fails for x86 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compo

[Bug regression/54084] Bunch of fails for x86

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54084 --- Comment #3 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-07-24 17:16:11 UTC --- Seems ok now

[Bug regression/54084] Bunch of fails for x86

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54084 --- Comment #5 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-07-26 08:44:01 UTC --- Looks like r189812 fixed some failures but not all of them. Patch from comment 2 fixes all problems

[Bug target/54156] [4.8 Regression] New fail on AVX target: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c. 190010 vs revision 189996

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54156 --- Comment #2 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-08-01 15:57:42 UTC --- Author: wschmidt Date: Tue Jul 31 12:25:04 2012 + gcc: 2012-07-31 Bill Schmidt PR tree-optimization/53773 * tree-vectorizer.h (struct _loop_vec_inf

[Bug target/54156] [4.8 Regression] New fail on AVX target: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c. 190010 vs revision 189996

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54156 --- Comment #3 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-08-03 13:38:05 UTC --- There are 6 "* 10" in a dump for AVX (additional 2 occur when vectorizer consider 32-byte vectorization)

[Bug target/54156] [4.8 Regression] New fail on AVX target: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c. 190010 vs revision 189996

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54156 --- Comment #7 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-08-03 19:24:40 UTC --- There are no those fails now, thanks! The bug could be closed.

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

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241 --- Comment #1 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-02-15 09:06:49 UTC --- BTW, this is a 4.7 regression

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

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241 --- Comment #16 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-02-19 18:58:41 UTC --- Jakub, could you please clarify your statement - "But libstdc++.so.6's tree.cc has been compiled with -fPIC -DPIC before Benjamin's change and is compiled with those flags after those

[Bug tree-optimization/52395] New: [4.7 Regression] Alignment issue at O2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52395 Bug #: 52395 Summary: [4.7 Regression] Alignment issue at O2 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P

[Bug tree-optimization/52395] [4.7 Regression] Alignment issue at O2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52395 --- Comment #2 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-02-27 09:47:38 UTC --- Right, more conservative :)

[Bug tree-optimization/52395] [4.7 Regression] Alignment issue at O2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52395 --- Comment #3 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-02-27 09:49:38 UTC --- x86_64 indeed, sorry

[Bug testsuite/52563] New: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-[3,4].c scan-tree-dump-times optimized "&a" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52563 Bug #: 52563 Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-[3,4].c scan-tree-dump-times optimized "&a" 1 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: tree-ssa Status: UNC

[Bug tree-optimization/52406] [4.7 Regression] likely wrong code bug

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52406 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug other/52626] New: make check fixinclude test FAILURES

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52626 Bug #: 52626 Summary: make check fixinclude test FAILURES Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c/52632] GCC compfail on O0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52632 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/52272] [4.7/4.8 regression] Performance regresswion of 410.bwaves on x86.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52272 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/52272] [4.7/4.8 regression] Performance regresswion of 410.bwaves on x86.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52272 --- Comment #10 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-03-29 11:04:27 UTC --- Is it possible to look at the regressed test-case and gcc dumps with -fdump-tree-ivopts-details option w/o that change? Thanks in advance

[Bug fortran/52865] New: GCC can't vectorize fortran loop but able to vectorize similar c-loop

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52865 Bug #: 52865 Summary: GCC can't vectorize fortran loop but able to vectorize similar c-loop Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRM

[Bug fortran/52865] GCC can't vectorize fortran loop but able to vectorize similar c-loop

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52865 --- Comment #1 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-04-04 13:27:11 UTC --- Created attachment 27088 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27088 C test

[Bug tree-optimization/52865] GCC can't vectorize fortran loop but able to vectorize similar c-loop

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52865 --- Comment #5 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-04-04 15:20:41 UTC --- Seems it doesn't like non-empty latch block in Fortran case

[Bug tree-optimization/52868] New: [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] 4.6 is faster on Atom

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52868 Bug #: 52868 Summary: [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] 4.6 is faster on Atom Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pri

[Bug fortran/52916] [4.8 Regression] 481.wrf in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52916 --- Comment #5 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-04-12 13:55:54 UTC --- With this patch 481.wrf is ok

[Bug tree-optimization/52865] GCC can't vectorize fortran loop but able to vectorize similar c-loop

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52865 --- Comment #6 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-04-16 07:16:56 UTC --- Any ideas what exactly does prevent the vectorization in the case of Fortran?

  1   2   3   >