This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Haney's real matrix test regression
- To: Richard Kenner <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>
- Subject: Re: Haney's real matrix test regression
- From: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at unitus dot it>
- Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:22:28 +0200
- CC: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, pete at ltoi dot iap dot physik dot tu-darmstadt dot de, CGLeggett at lbl dot gov
- Organization: Universita' della Tuscia
- References: <10110241204.AA07179@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
- Reply-To: pcarlini at unitus dot it
Richard Kenner wrote:
> Yes. I found a one-character typo in that change yesterday. I'm working
> some other fixes before checking that change in. If I don't figure them
> out soon, I'll just test with that change.
Hi all again... bad news...
Timing Real matrix operations for n = 200
Language Answer Check Time Iter Time
O-O C++ (2.41602e+06): 28.9 0.289
Hand-coded C (2.41602e+06): 14.84 0.1484
Unfortunately, today, after
Wed Oct 24 12:41:19 2001 Richard Kenner <firstname.lastname@example.org>
* emit-rtl.c (set_mem_attributes): Fix typo in last change.
* print-rtl.c (print_rtx, case MEM): Improve display of MEM_DECL.
that horrible slow down for C++ is still there...
My i686 is in fact a PII: perhaps someone may run "Haney Speed" built with
today's 3.1 on an AMD core to exclude quickly the possibility of another nasty
partial register stall???
P.S. My build switches for the Haney code were "-O2 -funroll-loops
-fomit-frame-pointer -DNo_Fortran -D__KCC". My system is a PII-400, 256M,
Linux2.4.10, glibc2.2.4, binutils2.11.2.