This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: nontrapping math in Java
- From: Bryce McKinlay <bryce at waitaki dot otago dot ac dot nz>
- To: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
- Cc: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>, Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, java at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 12:18:07 +1200
- Subject: Re: nontrapping math in Java
- References: <20020310122105.GD13110@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <87n0xd1s91.fsf@creche.redhat.com> <20020313100138.GD31812@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <15503.10096.252359.827808@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com> <20020313132150.B24576@redhat.com> <20020313212709.GN7745@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20020313133413.F24576@redhat.com> <20020324175604.GB3531@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
Jan Hubicka wrote:
>Did someone run benchmark with and without -fnon-call-exceptions?
>
I did.
My testing with the small "Sieve.java" on PowerPC @ -O2 showed no
difference to generated code as a result of -fnon-call-exceptions,
except for more unwind info being generated.
With a larger benchmark (jBYTEmark) on x86, there are some differences:
$ gcj -O2 *.java -o jbyte --main=jBYTEmark
$ ./jbyte
jBYTEmark ver. 0.9 +
OS: Linux 2.4.9-13
VM: GNU libgcj 3.2 20020324 (experimental)
Numeric Sort: 161.58
String Sort: 42.61
Bitfield Operations: 244.57
FP Emulation: 127.11
Fourier: 8.22
Assignment: 102.92
IDEA Encryption: 27.62
Huffman Compression: 108.35
Neural Net: 111.54
LU Decomposition: 73.33
-------
Integer Index: 94.22
FP Index: 40.67
$ gcj -O2 *.java -o jbyte --main=jBYTEmark -fnon-call-exceptions
$ ./jbyte
jBYTEmark ver. 0.9 +
OS: Linux 2.4.9-13
VM: GNU libgcj 3.2 20020324 (experimental)
Numeric Sort: 163.63
String Sort: 42.84
Bitfield Operations: 212.46
FP Emulation: 143.70
Fourier: 8.19
Assignment: 102.53
IDEA Encryption: 27.67
Huffman Compression: 108.54
Neural Net: 111.54
LU Decomposition: 80.44
-------
Integer Index: 94.22
FP Index: 41.88
I get similar results with "scimark2". So on my P3, some tests get
faster, some get slower, and the overall result is about the same.
regards
Bryce.