wangpc-pp wrote: > > > > The run just finished, I'm seeing a 0.75% improvement on > > > > 500.perlbench_r on the BPI F3 (-O3 -mcpu=spacemit-x60), no regressions > > > > or improvements on the other benchmarks as far as I can see. Seems to > > > > check out with the number of memcmps inlined reported for perlbench! > > > > > > > > > > Does spacemit-x60 support unaligned scalar memory and was your test with > > > or without that enabled? > > > > > > > > It supports unaligned scalar but not unaligned vector. And it seems we > > don't add these features to `-mcpu=spacemit-x60`. So I think @lukel97 ran > > the SPEC without unaligned scalar. > > Yeah, -mno-strict-align gave a bus error. I ultimately built it without > unaligned scalar since I wasn't sure if unaligned scalar was performant or > not.
IIRC, we have separated this into two options(scalar/vector) now. So maybe we can specify the scalar one. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/107548 _______________________________________________ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
