This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: [rfc] coalesce stack slots

Richard Henderson wrote:

On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 05:22:53PM -0400, Vladimir Makarov wrote:


This weekend I got some SPECINT results for your patch for P4. I've
checked -mtune=i386 and -march=i386/-mtune=pentium4. I am sorry,
Richard but in overall the score with the patch results in about 0.5%
slower code. I think freedom in insn scheduling (performed by P4) is
more important then better data locality for SPECINT.



Any chance you could point me at the particular variables being combined
in SPECINT that is causing the problem?  I have trouble believing that
many such variables exist.



Sorry, Richard. I have no idea where the problem occurs. It requires big work to analyze that. IMHO, the best test for this is vortex (becuase the biggest degradation -- about 2-3%). I don't remeber why but I got a conclusion that vortex benchmark has a lot of parallelism.

Vlad


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