This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Gimple loop splitting v2
- From: "Bin.Cheng" <amker dot cheng at gmail dot com>
- To: Michael Matz <matz at suse dot de>
- Cc: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches List <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 15:55:52 +0100
- Subject: Re: Gimple loop splitting v2
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <alpine.LSU.2.20.1511121734040.11029@wotan.suse.de> <5645083A.5070607@redhat.com> <alpine.LSU.2.20.1511161453390.11029@wotan.suse.de> <564A6648.6000002@redhat.com> <alpine.LSU.2.20.1512011711210.13533@wotan.suse.de> <565E25E7.7050202@redhat.com> <alpine.LSU.2.20.1512021420420.13533@wotan.suse.de> <5662987C.9080500@redhat.com> <alpine.LSU.2.20.1610201631360.5714@wotan.suse.de>
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Michael Matz <matz@suse.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 5 Dec 2015, Jeff Law wrote:
>
>> Nit. I don't think you want a comma after "so". And it looks like your
>> comment got truncated as well.
>>
>> With the comment above fixed, this is fine for the trunk.
>
> I'm terribly sorry to have dropped the ball here, but I've committed this
> now after not even a year ;-/ (r241374) Obviously after rebootstrapping
> with all,ada languages. I also did some benchmark run which should be
> taken with a grain of salt as the machine had fairly variant results but
> the improvements are real, though perhaps not always in that range (it's a
> normal three repeats run). I'm really curious if our automatic tester can
> pick up similar improvements, because if so, it's extreme (5 to 15 percent
> in some benchmarks) and we can brag about it for GCC 7 ;-)
This is nice, thanks for doing it. I will check the improvement on AArch64.
Thanks,
bin
>
> 400.perlbench 9770 519 18.8 * 9770 508 19.2 *
> 401.bzip2 9650 668 14.5 * 9650 666 14.5 *
> 403.gcc 8050 455 17.7 * 8050 432 18.6 *
> 429.mcf 9120 477 19.1 * 9120 467 19.5 *
> 445.gobmk 10490 643 16.3 * 10490 644 16.3 *
> 456.hmmer 9330 641 14.6 * 9330 614 15.2 *
> 458.sjeng 12100 784 15.4 * 12100 762 15.9 *
> 462.libquantum 20720 605 34.2 * 20720 600 34.5 *
> 464.h264ref 22130 969 22.8 * 22130 969 22.8 *
> 471.omnetpp 6250 438 14.3 * 6250 358 17.5 *
> 473.astar 7020 494 14.2 * 7020 492 14.3 *
> 483.xalancbmk 6900 342 20.2 * 6900 336 20.6 *
> Est. SPECint(R)_base2006 17.9
> Est. SPECint2006 18.5
>
> 410.bwaves 13590 563 24.1 * 13590 506 26.9 *
> 416.gamess NR NR
> 433.milc 9180 375 24.5 * 9180 349 26.3 *
> 434.zeusmp 9100 433 21.0 * 9100 423 21.5 *
> 435.gromacs 7140 402 17.7 * 7140 411 17.4 *
> 436.cactusADM 11950 486 24.6 * 11950 486 24.6 *
> 437.leslie3d 9400 421 22.4 * 9400 419 22.4 *
> 444.namd 8020 520 15.4 * 8020 520 15.4 *
> 447.dealII NR NR
> 450.soplex 8340 393 21.2 * 8340 391 21.3 *
> 453.povray 5320 277 19.2 * 5320 278 19.1 *
> 454.calculix 8250 453 18.2 * 8250 460 17.9 *
> 459.GemsFDTD 10610 542 19.6 * 10610 537 19.8 *
> 465.tonto 9840 492 20.0 * 9840 491 20.0 *
> 470.lbm 13740 466 29.5 * 13740 430 32.0 *
> 481.wrf 11170 492 22.7 * 11170 457 24.4 *
> 482.sphinx3 19490 659 29.6 * 19490 655 29.8 *
> Est. SPECfp(R)_base2006 21.6
> Est. SPECfp2006 22.1
>
>
> Ciao,
> Michael.