On 12/11/2015 02:11 AM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
Mibench/EEMBC benchmarks (Target Microblaze)
Automotive_qsort1(4.03%), Office_ispell(4.29%), Office_stringsearch1(3.5%).
Telecom_adpcm_d( 1.37%), ospfv2_lite(1.35%).
I'm having a real tough time reproducing any of these results. In fact,
I'm having a tough time seeing cases where path splitting even applies
to the Mibench/EEMBC benchmarks mentioned above.
In the very few cases where split-paths might apply, the net resulting
assembly code I get is the same with and without split-paths.
How consistent are these results?
What functions are being affected that in turn impact performance?
What options are you using to compile the benchmarks? I'm trying with
-O2 -fsplit-paths and -O3 in my attempts to trigger the transformation
so that I can look more closely at possible heuristics.
Is this with the standard microblaze-elf target? Or with some other target?
jeff
