On 26/03/12 11:54, Kostya Shishkov wrote: > On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 12:32:55PM -0700, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 7:05 AM, Kostya Shishkov >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Can we get at least several compilers and compiler version output for the >>> functions that use it? It's inline assembly, so compiler output for these >>> may vary greatly and fail register allocation for some other GCC version, >>> for instance. When we have it, then we can discuss it further. >> >> gcc-4.2.1: better after patch (less and shorter instructions) >> gcc-4.2.1/llvm: same number of instructions before/after, but shorter >> instructions after patch >> gcc-4.5.3: same number of instructions before/after, but shorter >> instructions after patch >> gcc-4.6.3: same number of instructions before/after, but shorter >> instructions after patch >> gcc-4.7.0: better after patch (less and shorter instructions) >> clang-3.0: same number of instructions before/after, but shorter >> instructions after patch >> >> Complete disassembly attached in before.txt and after.txt with each of >> the above compilers. > > Looks legit, what do other people think?
I tried to compare it and seems that the patch speeds up everything sensibly on linux/gcc-4.6.2. (ran 30 times for each interesting patch of the set, few times it got worse many times it got better I thrown away outliers and seems overall better) lu -- Luca Barbato Gentoo/linux http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
