Sebastian,
Here are (attached) results for testing HIRLAM with and without
-ftree-loop-linear.
As you can see, the results are neutral: 4 loops fewer vectorized, but
about 50 fewer recognized.
Now I like to redo that test with -ftree-loop-distribution. Can you
send me a patch against the trunk (otherwise it won't be a fair comparison).
Kind regards,
--
Toon Moene - e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
At home: http://moene.indiv.nluug.nl/~toon/
GNU Fortran's path to Fortran 2003: http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Fortran2003
Baseline, no source changes:
Mon Dec 10 17:45:19 UTC 2007 (revision 130746)
Compilation flags:
CCFLAGS := -g -O3 $(MACHINECPP) -ffast-math -fno-associative-math -march=native
-mtune=native -ftree-vectorizer-verbose=2
FCFLAGS := -g -O3 -fbacktrace -ffpe-trap=invalid,zero,overflow -ffast-math
-fno-associative-math -march=native -mtune=native -ftree-vectorizer-verbose=2
Loops vectorized:
5675
Loops not vectorized:
13705
Timings:
20061201_00/HL_Cycle_2006120100.html: FORECAST TOOK 12.7488 SECONDS
20061201_00/HL_Cycle_2006120100.html: FORECAST TOOK 2445.9609 SECONDS
20061201_06/HL_Cycle_2006120106.html: FORECAST TOOK 259.3362 SECONDS
20061201_06/HL_Cycle_2006120106.html: FORECAST TOOK 12.4408 SECONDS
20061201_06/HL_Cycle_2006120106.html: FORECAST TOOK 305.9351 SECONDS
20061201_12/HL_Cycle_2006120112.html: FORECAST TOOK 262.1124 SECONDS
20061201_12/HL_Cycle_2006120112.html: FORECAST TOOK 12.7448 SECONDS
20061201_12/HL_Cycle_2006120112.html: FORECAST TOOK 2323.3733 SECONDS
20061201_12r/HL_Cycle_2006120112r.html: FORECAST TOOK 412.7058 SECONDS
20061201_18/HL_Cycle_2006120118.html: FORECAST TOOK 264.5685 SECONDS
20061201_18/HL_Cycle_2006120118.html: FORECAST TOOK 12.6648 SECONDS
20061201_18/HL_Cycle_2006120118.html: FORECAST TOOK 306.7352 SECONDS
20061202_00/HL_Cycle_2006120200.html: FORECAST TOOK 261.5164 SECONDS
20061202_00/HL_Cycle_2006120200.html: FORECAST TOOK 12.7688 SECONDS
20061202_00/HL_Cycle_2006120200.html: FORECAST TOOK 2325.3774 SECONDS
20061202_00r/HL_Cycle_2006120200r.html: FORECAST TOOK 413.8739 SECONDS
Baseline, no source changes, with -ftree-loop-linear:
Mon Dec 10 17:45:19 UTC 2007 (revision 130746)
Compilation flags:
CCFLAGS := -g -O3 $(MACHINECPP) -ftree-loop-linear -ffast-math
-fno-associative-math -march=native -mtune=native -ftree-vectorizer-verbose=2
FCFLAGS := -g -O3 -ftree-loop-linear -fbacktrace
-ffpe-trap=invalid,zero,overflow -ffast-math -fno-associative-math
-march=native -mtune=native -ftree-vectorizer-verbose=2
This compilation got one ICE:
rttov_aitosu.f90: In function 'rttov_aitosu':
rttov_aitosu.f90:4: error: definition in block 262 does not dominate use in
block 134
for SSA_NAME: pretmp.240_59 in statement:
prephitmp.220_58 = PHI <pretmp.240_59(134), D.1480_1373(138)>
PHI argument
pretmp.240_59
for PHI node
prephitmp.220_58 = PHI <pretmp.240_59(134), D.1480_1373(138)>
rttov_aitosu.f90:4: internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
Worked around by compiling this file without -ftree-loop-linear
Loops vectorized:
5671
Loops not vectorized:
13655
Timings:
20061201_00/HL_Cycle_2006120100.html: FORECAST TOOK 12.5648 SECONDS
20061201_00/HL_Cycle_2006120100.html: FORECAST TOOK 2444.1208 SECONDS
20061201_06/HL_Cycle_2006120106.html: FORECAST TOOK 259.3402 SECONDS
20061201_06/HL_Cycle_2006120106.html: FORECAST TOOK 12.4728 SECONDS
20061201_06/HL_Cycle_2006120106.html: FORECAST TOOK 307.8672 SECONDS
20061201_12/HL_Cycle_2006120112.html: FORECAST TOOK 260.0323 SECONDS
20061201_12/HL_Cycle_2006120112.html: FORECAST TOOK 12.8608 SECONDS
20061201_12/HL_Cycle_2006120112.html: FORECAST TOOK 2310.2485 SECONDS
20061201_12r/HL_Cycle_2006120112r.html: FORECAST TOOK 411.3977 SECONDS
20061201_18/HL_Cycle_2006120118.html: FORECAST TOOK 261.1283 SECONDS
20061201_18/HL_Cycle_2006120118.html: FORECAST TOOK 12.7248 SECONDS
20061201_18/HL_Cycle_2006120118.html: FORECAST TOOK 308.1313 SECONDS
20061202_00/HL_Cycle_2006120200.html: FORECAST TOOK 262.7564 SECONDS
20061202_00/HL_Cycle_2006120200.html: FORECAST TOOK 12.6528 SECONDS
20061202_00/HL_Cycle_2006120200.html: FORECAST TOOK 2336.5620 SECONDS
20061202_00r/HL_Cycle_2006120200r.html: FORECAST TOOK 410.6577 SECONDS
