This patch enables -freorder-blocks-and-partition by default for x86
at -O2 and up. It is showing some modest gains in cpu2006 performance
with profile feedback and -O2 on an Intel Westmere system. Specifically,
I am seeing consistent improvements in 401.bzip2 (1.5-3%), 483.xalancbmk
(1.5-3%), and
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:21 AM, Martin Liška
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hello,
>>> >I prepared a collection of systemtap graphs for GIMP.
>>> >
>>> > 1) just my profile-based function re
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:21 AM, Martin Liška
wrote:
> Hello,
>I prepared a collection of systemtap gr
Martin,
can you, please, generate the updated systemtap with
-freorder-blocks-and-partition enabled?
I am in favour of enabling this - it is usefull pass and it is pointless ot
have passes that are not enabled by default.
Is there reason why this would not work on other ELF target? Is it working
w
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 7:44 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Martin,
> can you, please, generate the updated systemtap with
> -freorder-blocks-and-partition enabled?
>
> I am in favour of enabling this - it is usefull pass and it is pointless ot
> have passes that are not enabled by default.
> Is there r
On 11/19/13 10:24, Teresa Johnson wrote:
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 7:44 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Martin,
can you, please, generate the updated systemtap with
-freorder-blocks-and-partition enabled?
I am in favour of enabling this - it is usefull pass and it is pointless ot
have passes that are not
Teresa Johnson writes:
> This patch enables -freorder-blocks-and-partition by default for x86
> at -O2 and up. It is showing some modest gains in cpu2006 performance
> with profile feedback and -O2 on an Intel Westmere system. Specifically,
> I am seeing consistent improvements in 401.bzip2 (1.5-
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Teresa Johnson writes:
>
>> This patch enables -freorder-blocks-and-partition by default for x86
>> at -O2 and up. It is showing some modest gains in cpu2006 performance
>> with profile feedback and -O2 on an Intel Westmere system. Specifically
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/19/13 10:24, Teresa Johnson wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 7:44 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>>>
>>> Martin,
>>> can you, please, generate the updated systemtap with
>>> -freorder-blocks-and-partition enabled?
>>>
>>> I am in favour of enab
> Dear Teresa and Jan,
>I tried to test Teresa's patch, but I've encountered two bugs
> during usage of -fprofile-generate/use (one in SPEC CPU 2006 and
> Inkscape).
Thanks, this is non-LTO run. Is there a chance to get -flto version, too?
So we see how things combine with -freorder-function
>
On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 6:06 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> Dear Teresa and Jan,
>>I tried to test Teresa's patch, but I've encountered two bugs
>> during usage of -fprofile-generate/use (one in SPEC CPU 2006 and
>> Inkscape).
>
> Thanks, this is non-LTO run. Is there a chance to get -flto version,
On 12/02/13 08:16, Teresa Johnson wrote:
I'm wondering if the -fno-reorder-blocks-and-partition graph really
had that disabled. I am surprised that the size of the .text and
.text.hot did not shrink from splitting.
Could be due to needing longer jump opcodes to reach the unlikely sections.
jeff
Dear Teresa,
I will today double check if the graphs are correct :)
Martin
On 2 December 2013 17:16, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 12/02/13 08:16, Teresa Johnson wrote:
>>
>>
>> I'm wondering if the -fno-reorder-blocks-and-partition graph really
>> had that disabled. I am surprised that the size of th
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:21 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> Hello,
>I prepared a collection of systemtap graphs for GIMP.
>
> 1) just my profile-based function reordering: 550 pages
> 2) just -freorder-blocks-and-partitions: 646 pages
> 3) just -fno-reorder-blocks-and-partitions: 638 pages
>
> Plea
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:21 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> > Hello,
> >I prepared a collection of systemtap graphs for GIMP.
> >
> > 1) just my profile-based function reordering: 550 pages
> > 2) just -freorder-blocks-and-partitions: 646 pages
> > 3) just -fno-reorder-blocks-and-partitions: 638
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:21 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> > Hello,
> >I prepared a collection of systemtap graphs for GIMP.
> >
> > 1) just my profile-based function reordering: 550 pages
> > 2) just -freorder-blocks-and-partitions: 646 pages
> > 3) just -fno-reorder-blocks-and-partitions: 638
On 15 December 2013 23:17, Martin Liška wrote:
> Dear Jan and Teresa,
> Jan was right that I've been using changes which were commited by
> Teresa and do live in trunk. So the graph with time profile presented
> in my previous post was really with enabled
> -freorder-blocks-and-partition. I re
Thanks for the data. A few questions:
- Do you have the raw data used to generate your pdfs available? Since
you gave me the binaries, if I have the data in terms of exactly what
addresses are being plotted I can correlate with the specific cold
functions via nm. Once I know what cold functions ar
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:21 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >I prepared a collection of systemtap graphs for GIMP.
>> >
>> > 1) just my profile-based function reordering: 550 pages
>> > 2) just -freorder-blocks-and-partitions: 646
19 matches
Mail list logo
