Re: [PATCH PR62178]Improve candidate selecting in IVOPT, 2nd try.

2014-12-17 Thread Richard Biener
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 8:08 PM, Richard Biener >> wrote: >>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote: On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On F

Re: [PATCH PR62178]Improve candidate selecting in IVOPT, 2nd try.

2014-12-17 Thread Bin.Cheng
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 8:08 PM, Richard Biener > wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote: >>> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Richard Biener >>> wrote: On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Bin Cheng wrote: > Hi,

Re: Fwd: [PATCH PR62178]Improve candidate selecting in IVOPT, 2nd try.

2014-12-16 Thread Sebastian Pop
Bin.Cheng wrote: > Multisource/Benchmarks/mafft/pairlocalalign is regressed but I can't > reproduce it in cmd. The running time of compilation of > pairlocalalign.c is too small comparing to the results. I also tried > to invoke it by using RunSafely.sh but no lucky either. So any > documentatio

Re: [PATCH PR62178]Improve candidate selecting in IVOPT, 2nd try.

2014-12-16 Thread Bin.Cheng
Please ignore this one, I will further refine it. Sorry for disturbing! Thanks, bin On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 8:08 PM, Richard Biener > wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote: >>> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Richard B

Fwd: [PATCH PR62178]Improve candidate selecting in IVOPT, 2nd try.

2014-12-16 Thread Bin.Cheng
CCing Sebastian. Thanks, bin -- Forwarded message -- From: Bin.Cheng Date: Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 4:42 PM Subject: Re: [PATCH PR62178]Improve candidate selecting in IVOPT, 2nd try. To: Richard Biener Cc: Bin Cheng , GCC Patches , Zdenek Dvorak On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 8:08 PM

Re: [PATCH PR62178]Improve candidate selecting in IVOPT, 2nd try.

2014-12-16 Thread Bin.Cheng
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 8:08 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Richard Biener >> wrote: >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Bin Cheng wrote: Hi, Though PR62178 is hidden by recent cost change in aarch64 b

Re: [PATCH PR62178]Improve candidate selecting in IVOPT, 2nd try.

2014-12-15 Thread Sebastian Pop
Bin.Cheng wrote: > do we have some compilation time benchmarks for GCC? I'm using the llvm test-suite to see compile time differences: $ git clone http://llvm.org/git/test-suite.git /path/to/test-suite $ /path/to/test-suite/configure --without-llvmsrc --without-llvmobj --with-externals=/path/to/

Re: [PATCH PR62178]Improve candidate selecting in IVOPT, 2nd try.

2014-12-11 Thread Richard Biener
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Richard Biener > wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Bin Cheng wrote: >>> Hi, >>> Though PR62178 is hidden by recent cost change in aarch64 backend, the ivopt >>> issue still exists. >>> >>> Current candi

Re: [PATCH PR62178]Improve candidate selecting in IVOPT, 2nd try.

2014-12-11 Thread Bin.Cheng
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Richard Biener > wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Bin Cheng wrote: >>> Hi, >>> Though PR62178 is hidden by recent cost change in aarch64 backend, the ivopt >>> issue still exists. >>> >>> Current candid

Re: [PATCH PR62178]Improve candidate selecting in IVOPT, 2nd try.

2014-12-11 Thread Bin.Cheng
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Bin Cheng wrote: >> Hi, >> Though PR62178 is hidden by recent cost change in aarch64 backend, the ivopt >> issue still exists. >> >> Current candidate selecting algorithm tends to select fewer candidates give

Re: [PATCH PR62178]Improve candidate selecting in IVOPT, 2nd try.

2014-12-10 Thread Richard Biener
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Bin Cheng wrote: > Hi, > Though PR62178 is hidden by recent cost change in aarch64 backend, the ivopt > issue still exists. > > Current candidate selecting algorithm tends to select fewer candidates given > below reasons: > 1) to better handle loops with many indu

Re: [PATCH PR62178]Improve candidate selecting in IVOPT, 2nd try.

2014-12-09 Thread Bin.Cheng
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 12/05/14 05:15, Bin Cheng wrote: >> >> Hi, >> Though PR62178 is hidden by recent cost change in aarch64 backend, the >> ivopt >> issue still exists. >> >> Current candidate selecting algorithm tends to select fewer candidates >> given >> below

Re: [PATCH PR62178]Improve candidate selecting in IVOPT, 2nd try.

2014-12-09 Thread Jeff Law
On 12/05/14 05:15, Bin Cheng wrote: Hi, Though PR62178 is hidden by recent cost change in aarch64 backend, the ivopt issue still exists. Current candidate selecting algorithm tends to select fewer candidates given below reasons: 1) to better handle loops with many induction uses but the best

[PATCH PR62178]Improve candidate selecting in IVOPT, 2nd try.

2014-12-05 Thread Bin Cheng
Hi, Though PR62178 is hidden by recent cost change in aarch64 backend, the ivopt issue still exists. Current candidate selecting algorithm tends to select fewer candidates given below reasons: 1) to better handle loops with many induction uses but the best choice is one generic basic induction v