Vladimir Makarov wrote:
Jan Hubicka wrote:
Seems like something sensitive for setup. In our daily benchmarking LTO
fatster on wupwise (2116 compared to 1600), and facerec is 2003
compared to
2041 (so about the same).
http://gcc.opensuse.org/SPEC/CFP/sb-frescobaldi.suse.de-ai-64/list.html
http://gcc.opensuse.org/SPEC/CFP/sb-frescobaldi.suse.de-ipa-64/list.html
Did you test with -fwhole-program?
Yes, I used -flto -fwhole-program. All this info is on the page. The
test machine are also not experimental ones (the both are Dell machines).
I used the released sources may be a reason for the difference is in
different sources. In any case, I'll check the current trunk on these
machines.
The following I got on the today trunk for x86_64 (2.93 GHz Core i7):
wupwise
-O3 2670
-O3 -flto -fwhole-program 2211
-O3 -ffast-math 2753
-O3 -flto -fwhole-program -ffast-math 4325
So nothing is wrong with my test machine. We simply measure different
things. You use -ffast-math, I don't use it.
For the comparison I used simple combination of options for GCC and
LLVM. For me it is obvious that GCC results can be improved more than
LLVM by finding right options because it has much more optimizations.
Still it would be nice to fix LTO SPEC2000 degradations when -ffast-math
is not used.
