--- Comment #26 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-02 18:06 ---
Re. comment #25:
So does that mean this is not a 4.5 regression anymore? If so, please adjust
the summary also.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24319
--- Comment #25 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-02 18:02 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-09/msg3.html
was committed to trunk
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=151348
--
spop at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #24 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-01 06:55
---
*** Bug 41531 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #23 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2009-09-03 18:04
---
The gprof output on the _num.i example, with and without -fschedule-insns is at
http://www.math.purdue.edu/~lucier/bugzilla/11/gprof.out-fschedule-insns.gz
http://www.math.purdue.edu/~lucier/bugzilla/11/gprof.o
--- Comment #22 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2009-09-02 17:24
---
The output of gprof on this example is at
http://www.math.purdue.edu/~lucier/bugzilla/11/gprof.out.gz
Everything that takes more than a second is
Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds.
% cumulative self
--- Comment #21 from vmakarov at redhat dot com 2009-09-02 17:11 ---
I see. I though you compared '-fschedule-insns' and '-fschedule-insns
-fsched-pressure'.
Your numbers shows the same as I reported for SPEC2000. The -fsched-pressure
adds upto 3% compiler time (for power6) on x86 and
--- Comment #20 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2009-09-02 16:52
---
Vlad:
Thank you for your reply.
The times I reported are for "-fschedule-insns" without "-fpressure-sched".
The times with the addition of "-fpressure-sched" are not much greater than
with "-fschedule-insns"
--- Comment #19 from vmakarov at redhat dot com 2009-09-02 16:14 ---
As I wrote, implementing register pressure-sensitive insn scheduling needs to
look at all insns (ready or not) with resolved dependencies. In an extreme
cases, such insns could b 10-100 more than the ready ones. Sch
--- Comment #18 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2009-09-02 02:54
---
Vlad:
The patch works great in my tests so far, thanks.
After installing your patch on today's trunk so that -fschedule-insns actually
works, I find it is quite expensive on large files.
For example, with tod
--- Comment #17 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-09-01 12:08 ---
Patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-09/msg3.html
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #16 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2009-08-28 16:54
---
Re: Comment 7:
Since end users will gain little benefit from being able to run the sched1 pass
on x86 code, I don't think this is a serious problem.
PR33928 (comments 108 and 111) give an example where -fsched
--- Comment #15 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-08-27 17:33 ---
*** Bug 41164 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #14 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-04 12:27
---
GCC 4.3.4 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #13 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-31 18:58 ---
Closing 4.2 branch.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary
14 matches
Mail list logo
