This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Loop unrolling-related SPEC regressions?
- From: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>
- To: Joe Buck <jbuck at synopsys dot COM>
- Cc: pcarlini at unitus dot it (Paolo Carlini), gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org,rth at redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2002 17:34:14 +0100
- Subject: Re: Loop unrolling-related SPEC regressions?
- References: <200202011914.LAA03458@atrus.synopsys.com>
Joe Buck <jbuck@synopsys.COM> writes:
>> browsing the latest results from Andreas, it looks like a few of them (e.g.,
>> 164.gzip, 186.crafty, 200.sixtrack) are showing a definite regression in the
>> PEAK case, characterized by -funroll-all-loops.
> It's not clear to me that -funroll-all-loops is the correct setting for
> PEAK, as bloating out the code may make the cache perform worse.
I know it's not the best setting but I'm not going for the best
numbers but for consistency - and like to test different areas of the
SuSE Labs email@example.com