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
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
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 3:30 AM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
First, the loop passes that at the moment preceede IVOPTs leave
around IL that is in desparate need of basic re-optimization
like CSE, constant propagation
On Mon, 9 Sep 2013, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
First, the loop passes that at the moment preceede IVOPTs leave
around IL that is in desparate need of basic re-optimization
like CSE, constant propagation and DCE. That puts extra load
On 09/10/2013 02:00 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, 9 Sep 2013, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
First, the loop passes that at the moment preceede IVOPTs leave
around IL that is in desparate need of basic re-optimization
like CSE, constant
On Tue, 10 Sep 2013, Jeff Law wrote:
On 09/10/2013 02:00 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, 9 Sep 2013, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
First, the loop passes that at the moment preceede IVOPTs leave
around IL that is in
On 09/10/2013 07:23 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
update-ssa for example just queues to release SSA names. But yes,
re-using SSA names from a freelist has issues and advantages ;)
Yup. I've wondered from time to time if we could do away with the name
manager -- IIRCC it was written when we took
On Tue, 10 Sep 2013, Jeff Law wrote:
On 09/10/2013 07:23 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
update-ssa for example just queues to release SSA names. But yes,
re-using SSA names from a freelist has issues and advantages ;)
Yup. I've wondered from time to time if we could do away with the name
On Sun, 8 Sep 2013, pins...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sep 8, 2013, at 7:01 PM, Bin.Cheng amker.ch...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de wrote:
The patch below moves IVOPTs out of the GIMPLE loop pipeline more
closer to RTL expansion. That's
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
First, the loop passes that at the moment preceede IVOPTs leave
around IL that is in desparate need of basic re-optimization
like CSE, constant propagation and DCE. That puts extra load
on IVOPTs and its cost model, increasing
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de wrote:
The patch below moves IVOPTs out of the GIMPLE loop pipeline more
closer to RTL expansion. That's done for multiple reasons.
First, the loop passes that at the moment preceede IVOPTs leave
around IL that is in desparate
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Bin.Cheng amker.ch...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de wrote:
The patch below moves IVOPTs out of the GIMPLE loop pipeline more
closer to RTL expansion. That's done for multiple reasons.
First, the loop passes
On Sep 8, 2013, at 7:01 PM, Bin.Cheng amker.ch...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de wrote:
The patch below moves IVOPTs out of the GIMPLE loop pipeline more
closer to RTL expansion. That's done for multiple reasons.
First, the loop passes
The patch below moves IVOPTs out of the GIMPLE loop pipeline more
closer to RTL expansion. That's done for multiple reasons.
First, the loop passes that at the moment preceede IVOPTs leave
around IL that is in desparate need of basic re-optimization
like CSE, constant propagation and DCE. That
14 matches
Mail list logo
