https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112919
Xi Ruoyao <xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Also| |https://github.com/loongson
| |-community/discussions/issu
| |es/23
CC| |chenglulu at loongson dot cn,
| |xen0n at gentoo dot org
Target| |loongarch64-*-*
--- Comment #1 from Xi Ruoyao <xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Jia Jie reported a huge performance regression running Coremarks from GCC 13 to
14, and I can confirm it on LA664.
It seems a part of the regression is caused by over-aligning the labels. On a
LA664 with different configurations I get Coremarks Iterations/Sec values (the
larger the better):
21120 with GCC 13.2.0
18320 with GCC 14.0.0 (with the default: -falign-labels=16
-falign-functions=32)
19972 with GCC 14.0.0 + -falign-loops=32 -falign-labels=4 -falign-jumps=4
-falign-functions=32 (the best I've got)
19938 with GCC 14.0.0 + -falign-loops=32 -falign-labels=4 -falign-jumps=4
-falign-functions=16
19964 with GCC 14.0.0 + -falign-loops=32 -falign-labels=4 -falign-jumps=4
-falign-functions=64
19276 with GCC 14.0.0 + -falign-loops=32 -falign-labels=8 -falign-jumps=4
-falign-functions=32
19674 with GCC 14.0.0 + -falign-loops=32 -falign-labels=4 -falign-jumps=8
-falign-functions=32
19752 with GCC 14.0.0 + -falign-loops=16 -falign-labels=4 -falign-jumps=4
-falign-functions=32
19922 with GCC 14.0.0 + -falign-loops=64 -falign-labels=4 -falign-jumps=4
-falign-functions=32
Lulu: can you help to run some other benchmarks like SPEC (I don't have an
access to it) and update these values for LA464 and LA664?
