This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [tree-ssa] RFC: Making control flow more explicit


Op zo 10-08-2003, om 21:49 schreef Daniel Berlin:
> Just as a note about stability, his patches pass all but 2 regression 
> tests, and
> build and run all of SPEC with no problems (other than the gcc 
> miscompares we get anyway).

Ehrm... there are some other problems, in particular with exception
handling.  For example, the test case for PR8361 doesn't compile, and a
large body of C++ I'm working on doesn't compile either.  I already
pointed that out yesterday.


> SPECFP base on  the C programs without his changes :
> 
>     177.mesa          1400   173       808
>     179.art           2600   428       607
>     183.equake        1300   142       917
>     188.ammp          2200   554       397
> 
> 
> With his changes:
> 177.mesa          1400   171       820
> 179.art           2600   419       620
> 183.equake        1300   138       944
> 188.ammp          2200   540       407

Yummie that's impressive.  Hope you can stamp out the bugs, Zdenek :)


Gr.
Steven

PS.  Hmm now I think of it, how are those numbers possible?  Didn't
these patches break the loop optimizer???




Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]