Hmmm I wasn't expecting a huge speedup but was hoping for a few
percentage points at least. Can you fork GHC on github and put your
patch up on there and then send me a link please? This is just a far
easier workflow for me to review and merge patches than email.

Cheers,
David

On 13 October 2011 01:37, Erik de Castro Lopo <[email protected]> wrote:
> David Terei wrote:
>
>> Yes that will work and be a large scale test. Easier though is to just
>> use the nofib benchmark 'included' with ghc.
>>
>> Thanks for having a crack at this Erik.
>
> Ok, after being distracted by some work related stiff I'm back
> on this issue.
>
> I used the compile time part of the nofib benchmark and compared
> three configurations:
>
>   fasm-1      - Compile with -fasm before my llvm ppr changes.
>   fllvm-1     - Compile with -fllvm before my llvm ppr changes.
>   fllvm-ppr-1 - Compile with -fllvm after my llvm ppr changes.
>
> The nofib-analyse output comparing all three and just the two
> -fllvm versions are included below which shows that my ppr
> shows a slight compile speed up but going via the llvm backend
> is still significantly slower incomparison to via the NCG.
>
> I suspect that better benchmarking could be acheived by testing the
> LLVM output in isolation.
>
> I have also attached the patch that I tested.
>
> Cheers,
> Erik
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Erik de Castro Lopo
> http://www.mega-nerd.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cvs-ghc mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
>
>

_______________________________________________
Cvs-ghc mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc

Reply via email to