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: [patch] tuning gcc for Intel Core2

From: Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>
To: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
Cc: Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>, "H. J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>, Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov at redhat dot com>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:59:42 -0800
Subject: Re: [patch] tuning gcc for Intel Core2
References: <4558A4DD.1080407@redhat.com> <20061114062718.GA11289@lucon.org> <4559DBCA.2040006@redhat.com> <20061114154956.GB15035@lucon.org> <20061115180730.GA25159@lucon.org> <20061115205624.GL26843@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <20061115222511.GA26978@lucon.org> <20061115223351.GQ26843@kam.mff.cuni.cz>

On Nov 15, 2006, at 2:33 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Are there some major algorithmic differences in between
Opteron/Core/Nocona needs or it all just depends on the thresholds for
various algorithm (I found out that those chips do have quite
conflicting requireemnets regarding rep/movs sequence.).


There is some data for Nocona here, if it helps.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-08/msg01614.html

References:
- [patch] tuning gcc for Intel Core2
  - From: Vladimir Makarov
- Re: [patch] tuning gcc for Intel Core2
  - From: H. J. Lu
- Re: [patch] tuning gcc for Intel Core2
  - From: Vladimir Makarov
- Re: [patch] tuning gcc for Intel Core2
  - From: H. J. Lu
- Re: [patch] tuning gcc for Intel Core2
  - From: H. J. Lu
- Re: [patch] tuning gcc for Intel Core2
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: [patch] tuning gcc for Intel Core2
  - From: H. J. Lu
- Re: [patch] tuning gcc for Intel Core2
  - From: Jan Hubicka

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