On 4/27/07, Janne Blomqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I spent some time with oprofile, trying to figure out why we suck at the
gas_dyn benchmark in polyhedron. It turns out that there are two lines
that account for ~54% of the total runtime.
In subroutine CHOZDT we have the line
DTEM
On 4/27/07, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think that even with -ffast-math 12 bits accuracy is not ok. There is
the possibility of doing another newton iteration step to improve
accuracy, that would be ok for -ffast-math. We can, though, add an
extra flag -msserecip or however y
On Fri, 26 Apr 2007, Geoffrey Keating wrote:
> This seems reasonable to me, but maybe it would be simpler to write
>
> If there are one or more incomplete structure or union types which
> cannot all be completed without producing undefined behaviour, the
> behaviour is undefined.
>
> if that giv
Richard Guenther wrote:
See also http://www.suse.de/~gcctest/c++bench/polyhedron/analysis.html
(same conclusion for gas_dyn).
Thanks, I seem to have completely missed that page (though I was aware
of your polyhedron tester).
>On 4/27/07, Janne Blomqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The
rea
Thomas Koenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| [adjusting Subject and also forwarding to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| On Wed, 2007-04-18 at 12:12 -0700, Vivek Rao wrote:
| > Here is a feature of g95 that I would like to see in
| > gfortran. G95 assigns numbers to warnings and allows
| > selected warnings t
On 27 Apr 2007 08:50:57 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thomas Koenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| [adjusting Subject and also forwarding to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| On Wed, 2007-04-18 at 12:12 -0700, Vivek Rao wrote:
| > Here is a feature of g95 that I would like to see in
| >
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 01:52:37PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 09:49:16PM +0200, Rask Ingemann Lambertsen wrote:
> >Unfortunately, the fallback code isn't exactly optimum, as it produces
> > something like
> >
> > addw$-N*2, %sp
> > movw%sp,%b
Hello,
Looking at builtins, I think I have found something inconsistent.
__builtin_ffs is defined in the documentation as taking an unsigned int
parameter:
Built-in Function: int __builtin_ffs (unsigned int x)
However in the file builtins.def, it is defined as:
DEF_EXT_LIB_BUILTIN (BUILT_IN
On Apr 27, 2007, at 06:12, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
I agree it can be an issue, but OTOH people who care about
precision probably 1. avoid -ffast-math 2. use double precision
(where these reciprocal instrs are not available). Intel calls it -
no-prec-div, but it's enabled for the "-fast" catch
Geert Bosch wrote:
I truly doubt that any of the compilers you mention use these
instructions without NR iteration to get required precision.
If they do then they are probably seriously broken, not just
because they give complete junk results in this case, but
such an implementation would indi
On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 04:00:13PM +0200, Rask Ingemann Lambertsen wrote:
>I don't see how emit_move_complex_push() can ever generate a push
> instruction. Here's a backtrace:
emit_move_insn (gen_rtx_MEM (submode, XEXP (x, 0)),
read_complex_part (y, imag_first));
return e
Geert Bosch wrote:
On Apr 27, 2007, at 06:12, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
I agree it can be an issue, but OTOH people who care about precision
probably 1. avoid -ffast-math 2. use double precision (where these
reciprocal instrs are not available). Intel calls it -no-prec-div, but
it's enabled for t
> "Kaveh" == Kaveh R GHAZI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Kaveh> I'm doing this at the tree level, so AIUI I have to be mindful of type,
Kaveh> scope and conflicts. I also have to decide what to do in non-C.
There's nothing to do here for Java -- Java code can't access lgamma.
Not to be too ne
Janne Blomqvist wrote:
However, I didn't realize so few iterations were required to achieve
(almost) full precision. That's pretty nice.
NR is a nice iteration, you double the number of bits of precision
on each iteration (approximately :-)
On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 04:23:35PM +0200, Erven ROHOU wrote:
> I think it should be BT_FN_INT_UINT. (Other functions like clz, parity,
> popcount are defined with unsigned int.)
> Unless I am missing something...
man 3 ffs.
r~
FYI, gomp in mainline is broken:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31722
Possible cause may be:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg01965.html
H.J.
Andrew, are you still planning on applying the libobjc patch that
removes the use of __builtin_apply?
Steve Ellcey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 27 April 2007 16:58, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 04:23:35PM +0200, Erven ROHOU wrote:
>> I think it should be BT_FN_INT_UINT. (Other functions like clz, parity,
>> popcount are defined with unsigned int.)
>> Unless I am missing something...
>
> man 3 ffs.
>
>
> r~
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Tom Tromey wrote:
> Not to be too negative (I am curious about this), but does this sort of
> optimization really carry its own weight? Is this a common thing in
> numeric code or something like that?
> Tom
I don't know that optimizing lgamma by itself makes a big difference
As Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> > What's that test suite that has been mentioned here, and how to
> > run it?
> http://www.inf.u-szeged.hu/csibe/
Thanks for the pointer. Got it. Alas, that tool is completely
unportable, and requires Linux to run. It suffers from bashomania
(like using $((I--)) w
On 4/27/07, Joerg Wunsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> > What's that test suite that has been mentioned here, and how to
> > run it?
> http://www.inf.u-szeged.hu/csibe/
Thanks for the pointer. Got it. Alas, that tool is completely
unportable, and requires Linux to r
On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 08:24:11AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 04:00:13PM +0200, Rask Ingemann Lambertsen wrote:
> >I don't see how emit_move_complex_push() can ever generate a push
> > instruction. Here's a backtrace:
>
> emit_move_insn (gen_rtx_MEM (submode, X
On 27/04/2007, at 2:50 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Fri, 26 Apr 2007, Geoffrey Keating wrote:
This seems reasonable to me, but maybe it would be simpler to write
If there are one or more incomplete structure or union types which
cannot all be completed without producing undefined behaviour,
As Steven Bosscher wrote:
> >The idea behind that tool is great, I only wish the authors had
> >taken a class in portable shell scripting before. It's not that
> >all the world's a Vax these days...
> Patches welcome, I guess.
Well, quite an amount of work, alas. There's no central template in
Snapshot gcc-4.3-20070427 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.3-20070427/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.3 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
In case anyone here sends me an email, and gets my vacation auto-reply
for the next week: I do still plan to proceed with the 4.2.0 release
schedule in my last status report.
FYI,
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(650) 331-3385 x713
26 matches
Mail list logo
