Gimple loop splitting v2

Bin.Cheng amker.cheng@gmail.com
Mon Oct 24 08:44:00 GMT 2016


On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Bin.Cheng <amker.cheng@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.
Hi,
Unfortunately I didn't reproduce the improvement in my run on AArch64,
I will double check if I made some mistakes.

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.



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list