Okay, I think I can withdraw the suggestion. It is apparently not providing a
stable end performance.
I would like to end with sharing the measurements I made that motivated me to
suggest the change. Hopefully it can be useful if tree-slp-vectorize gets
improved and the suggestion comes up agai
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 11:25 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 5:24 PM Allan Sandfeld Jensen
> wrote:
> > On Dienstag, 29. Mai 2018 16:57:56 CEST Richard Biener wrote:
> > >
> > > so the situation improves but isn't fully fixed (STLF issues maybe?)
> > >
> > That raises the q
On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 5:24 PM Allan Sandfeld Jensen
wrote:
> On Dienstag, 29. Mai 2018 16:57:56 CEST Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > so the situation improves but isn't fully fixed (STLF issues maybe?)
> >
> That raises the question if it helps in these cases even in -O3?
That's a good question
On Dienstag, 29. Mai 2018 16:57:56 CEST Richard Biener wrote:
>
> so the situation improves but isn't fully fixed (STLF issues maybe?)
>
That raises the question if it helps in these cases even in -O3?
Anyway it doesn't look good for it. Did the binary size at least improve with
prefer-avx128,
On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 11:32 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 5:50 PM Allan Sandfeld Jensen
> wrote:
> > On Montag, 28. Mai 2018 12:58:20 CEST Richard Biener wrote:
> > > compile-time effects of the patch on that. Embedded folks may want to
> rhn
> > > their favorite benchmar
On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 5:50 PM Allan Sandfeld Jensen
wrote:
> On Montag, 28. Mai 2018 12:58:20 CEST Richard Biener wrote:
> > compile-time effects of the patch on that. Embedded folks may want to
rhn
> > their favorite benchmark and report results as well.
> >
> > So I did a -O2 -march=haswell [
On Montag, 28. Mai 2018 12:58:20 CEST Richard Biener wrote:
> compile-time effects of the patch on that. Embedded folks may want to rhn
> their favorite benchmark and report results as well.
>
> So I did a -O2 -march=haswell [-ftree-slp-vectorize] SPEC CPU 2006 compile
> and run and the compile-ti
On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 12:36 PM Richard Biener
wrote:
> On May 26, 2018 11:32:29 AM GMT+02:00, Allan Sandfeld Jensen <
li...@carewolf.com> wrote:
> >I brought this subject up earlier, and was told to suggest it again for
> >gcc 9,
> >so I have attached the preliminary changes.
> >
> >My studies
On Sonntag, 27. Mai 2018 03:23:36 CEST Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 01:25:25AM +0200, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> > On Sonntag, 27. Mai 2018 00:05:32 CEST Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 11:32:29AM +0200, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> > > > I broug
On May 27, 2018 1:25:25 AM GMT+02:00, Allan Sandfeld Jensen
wrote:
>On Sonntag, 27. Mai 2018 00:05:32 CEST Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 11:32:29AM +0200, Allan Sandfeld Jensen
>wrote:
>> > I brought this subject up earlier, and was told to suggest it again
>for
>> > gcc 9,
On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 01:25:25AM +0200, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> On Sonntag, 27. Mai 2018 00:05:32 CEST Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 11:32:29AM +0200, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> > > I brought this subject up earlier, and was told to suggest it again for
> > > gc
On Sonntag, 27. Mai 2018 00:05:32 CEST Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 11:32:29AM +0200, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> > I brought this subject up earlier, and was told to suggest it again for
> > gcc 9, so I have attached the preliminary changes.
> >
> > My studies have show
On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 11:32:29AM +0200, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> I brought this subject up earlier, and was told to suggest it again for gcc
> 9,
> so I have attached the preliminary changes.
>
> My studies have show that with generic x86-64 optimization it reduces binary
> size with ar
* Allan Sandfeld Jensen:
> Anythhing else I should test or report?
Interaction with -mstackrealign on i386, where it is required for
system libraries to support applications which use the legacy ABI
without stack alignment if you compile with -msse2 or -march=x86-64
-mtune=generic (and -mfpmath=s
On May 26, 2018 11:32:29 AM GMT+02:00, Allan Sandfeld Jensen
wrote:
>I brought this subject up earlier, and was told to suggest it again for
>gcc 9,
>so I have attached the preliminary changes.
>
>My studies have show that with generic x86-64 optimization it reduces
>binary
>size with around 0.
I brought this subject up earlier, and was told to suggest it again for gcc 9,
so I have attached the preliminary changes.
My studies have show that with generic x86-64 optimization it reduces binary
size with around 0.5%, and when optimizing for x64 targets with SSE4 or
better, it reduces bina
16 matches
Mail list logo
