On Wed, 11 Sep 2013, Pat Haugen wrote: > On 09/04/2013 04:20 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > Any help with benchmarking this on targets other than x86_64 > > is appreciated (I'll re-do x86_64). > > > I ran CPU2000 and CPU2006 on PowerPC comparing the patch. CPU2000 had 3 > benchmarks degrade in the 4%-6%range (254.gap, 168.wupwise, 173.applu).CPU2006 > showed one benchmark, 410.bwaves, degrading 9%.I have dug into applu/bwaves > and saw nothing directly attributable to your patch, degradations looked to be > caused by idioms/oddities of the PowerPC architecture related to minor > scheduling differences and/or data location.
Ok, I won't pursue the patch further at the moment unless a compelling reason comes around. The idea I had back in time I proposed this first was that we'd like to expose the effects of PROMOTE_MODE to IVOPTs which would be easiest if the GIMPLE IL would be lowered (we may be better optimizing required truncations for example by VRP). Of course I didn't get around to playing with this (mainly because x86 doesn't care ...). Thanks for doing the measurement, Richard.
