Re: [RFC] Contributing tree-ssa to mainline

[Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>]

> > 
> > Hi Jan,
> > > Perhaps you could provide details of where you 2 or 3% comes from?
> > 
> > My apologies.  The two URLs given in your posting do indeed show
> > GCC 3.3 only about 6% behind Intel 7.0, with aggressive optimizations.
> > Indeed, this is a much fairer comparison than the "apples-and-oranges"
> > results linked from Andreas' site.
> 
> This compare to hammer branch GCC 3.3 and 64bit to 32bit mode, so it is
> not also really fine comparsion.  (attached)
> I will have 32bit results on the same hardware bu tomorrow.  I already
> checked that mainline outperforms hammer branch at -O2, at aggressive
> settings we have more issues, but I am just analyzing them and at least
> eon I analyzed yesterday was simple defect in profiling and
> -fwritable-strings.
> 
> In fact we misscompile following constructor:
> 
> struct a{
> 	int a; char *b;
> } a={1,"ahoj"};
> 
> if there are no plans to fix this deprecated feature, I would preffer to
> just kill it as this is important defect and it took me about 2 hours
> yesterday to work out why profiling is broken.
> 
> Also the peak runs suffer from too large inlining limit I already fixed.
> another problem is too large unrolling limit I will try to trottle and
> produce patch too.
> 
> I will post more complette results once I am done.
> 
> Honza
> 
> Hi,
> Here's the requested output from gcc-benchmark.
> Base Compiler: hamer branch
> Peak Compiler: mainline
> cflags base: -O2
> cflags peak: -O2
> Iterations: 1
> Running on: vivaldi
> Hardware: x86_64/AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 242 at 1593.799
> PDO for base and peak: No
> PDO for peak only: No
> Using gfortran instead of F77: No
> This run is: SPECint

I forgot to note.  These runs were done with oprofile running so they
are not comparable to any other published results.

Honza