This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: GCC Benchmarks (coybench), AMD64 and i686, 14 August 2004

From: Scott Robert Ladd <coyote at coyotegulch dot com>
To: Giovanni Bajo <giovannibajo at libero dot it>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:43:48 -0400
Subject: Re: GCC Benchmarks (coybench), AMD64 and i686, 14 August 2004
References: <411F794B.8090704@coyotegulch.com> <003201c48301$964dbee0$51b82997@bagio>

Giovanni Bajo wrote: > Can you please file a bugreport with a preprocessed version of the mole test?

We can flag it as a regression and hopefully have it fixed before the release.

Filed as 17050, with -save-temps source file.

This problem is unique to either 64-bit or Opteron code generation, given that my Pentium 4 does not show the same regression. On the other hand, Intel produces code that is 6X faster on Pentium 4, suggesting that GCC's code generation may be weak there as well.

--
Scott Robert Ladd
Coyote Gulch Productions (http://www.coyotegulch.com)
Software Invention for High-Performance Computing

Follow-Ups:
- Re: GCC Benchmarks (coybench), AMD64 and i686, 14 August 2004
  - From: Marcel Cox

References:
- GCC Benchmarks (coybench), AMD64 and i686, 14 August 2004
  - From: Scott Robert Ladd
- Re: GCC Benchmarks (coybench), AMD64 and i686, 14 August 2004
  - From: Giovanni Bajo

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