This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug libstdc++/52241] Performance degradation of 447.dealII on corei7 at spec2006_base32.
- From: "vbyakovl23 at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 18:04:45 +0000
- Subject: [Bug libstdc++/52241] Performance degradation of 447.dealII on corei7 at spec2006_base32.
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-52241-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241
--- Comment #20 from Vladimir Yakovlev <vbyakovl23 at gmail dot com> 2012-02-20 18:04:45 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> Nice, so we want Paolo's patch. Out of interest, what are the 447.deal numbers
> when comparing linking against old (pre-Benjamin's commit) libstdc++.a and
> current libstdc++.a with Paolo's patch (or libstdc++.so.6, i.e. without
> -static)?
Runspec numbers (as runspec prints) for both static and dynamic
Static
Base:
Old: 447.dealII 11440 324 35.3 *
New: 447.dealII 11440 302 37.9 *
Peak:
Old: 447.dealII 11440 285 40.2 *
New: 447.dealII 11440 268 42.6 *
Dynamic
Base:
Old: 447.dealII 11440 327 34.9 *
New: 447.dealII 11440 327 35.0 *
Peak:
Old: 447.dealII 11440 287 39.9 S
New: 447.dealII 11440 288 39.7 *
So, no effect in dynamic case. Is it right?