This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: 252.EON dropped 25% on between 8-31 and 9-02
- From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
- To: dberlin at dberlin dot org (Daniel Berlin)
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org (gcc-patches), jconner at apple dot com (Josh Conner)
- Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 18:32:47 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: 252.EON dropped 25% on between 8-31 and 9-02
> Just to be clear, i'm looking at diego's em64t tester.
> On 9/21/06, Daniel Berlin <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Our SPEC2000 performance on 252.eon dropped by a pretty large amount
> > between those days.
> > The only patch I see that could have affected this was:
> > +2006-09-01 Josh Conner <email@example.com>
> > +
> > + PR c++/25505
> > + * tree-nrv.c (dest_safe_for_nrv_p): New function.
> > + (execute_return_slot_opt): Use it.
> > Josh, I assume you access to SPEC, so could you take a look at this?
> > (Sorry if i have pegged the wrong patch, i'm just going by the spec
> > tester diffs).
The other patch which might had effect on the scores is the patch to builtins.c about alignment.