On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, mike wrote:
> Seems im not the only soul feeling the bloat > http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10358024-16.html > > I havent seen any 68k linux benchmarks for this yet > http://cshandley.co.uk/temp/membench/ > http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=29569&forum=14 These benchmarks aren't for linux, right? > > It would be interesting if someone could compare a binary compiled with > gcc 2.95 to 3.33 3.40 and or 4.4 for linux, on various systems even. To > see if the slowdown has any consistency. If you would like to run some linux benchmarks, I could build the latest kernel using several different compilers for you. I'd need a kernel config to suit your hardware though. But if you want to compare different compilers using benchmarks for a different operating system, I can't help with that. You may have more luck with that on the relevant mailing list or forum. Finn > > -Mike > > > 2009/9/14 <[email protected]>: > > > > On Sun, 13 Sep 2009, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: > > > >> [email protected] wrote: > >> > >> > On Sat, 5 Sep 2009, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: > >> > > >> > > Finn Thain wrote: ... > >> > > > >> > > > I understand that the current GCC (4.4) lacks the necessary > >> > > > patches, and 4.5 is still uncooked (and that's a scary prospect). > >> > > > Can someone confirm that this is the necessary patch for 4.4: > >> > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-05/msg01024.html > >> > > I think GCC 4.4 should be good enough. > >> > > >> > I tried patching 4.4.1 and the patch was rejected. It expects > >> > m68k_legitimize_address() to have been declared and defined, but that > >> > routine isn't in gcc-4.4. > >> > >> m68k.c:m68k_legitimize_address() was macro m68k.h:LEGITIMIZE_ADDRESS(), > >> you need to move the hunk to m68k.h. > >> > > > > Thanks for the tip. > > > > Here's a second cut. This one removes the m68k_tls_symbol_p() routine and > > inlines that logic in the LEGITIMIZE_ADDRESS macro (avoids a reference to > > m68k_tls_symbol_p() from explow.o). The TARGET_HAVE_TLS macro wasn't > > defined in explow.c so I changed it to HAVE_AS_TLS. > > > > It appears to work, but I won't be able to test any binary produced by > > this compiler for a week or so. > > > > Finn > > > > > > --- gcc-m68k-support-for-tls.patch 2009-09-14 15:11:39.893286532 +1000 > > +++ gcc-m68k-support-for-tls-backport.patch 2009-09-14 > > 15:11:34.563287784 +1000 > > @@ -574,13 +574,7 @@ > > > > enum reg_class regno_reg_class[] = > > { > > -@@ -143,11 +144,13 @@ static tree m68k_handle_fndecl_attribute > > - static void m68k_compute_frame_layout (void); > > - static bool m68k_save_reg (unsigned int regno, bool interrupt_handler); > > - static bool m68k_ok_for_sibcall_p (tree, tree); > > -+static bool m68k_tls_symbol_p (rtx); > > - static rtx m68k_legitimize_address (rtx, rtx, enum machine_mode); > > - static bool m68k_rtx_costs (rtx, int, int, int *, bool); > > +@@ -146,6 +147,7 @@ static tree m68k_handle_fndecl_attribute > > #if M68K_HONOR_TARGET_STRICT_ALIGNMENT > > static bool m68k_return_in_memory (const_tree, const_tree); > > #endif > > @@ -613,16 +607,6 @@ > > && crtl->uses_pic_offset_table) > > insn = emit_insn (gen_load_got (pic_offset_table_rtx)); > > } > > -@@ -1431,6 +1441,9 @@ m68k_legitimize_sibcall_address (rtx x) > > - rtx > > - m68k_legitimize_address (rtx x, rtx oldx, enum machine_mode mode) > > - { > > -+ if (m68k_tls_symbol_p (x)) > > -+ return m68k_legitimize_tls_address (x); > > -+ > > - if (GET_CODE (x) == PLUS) > > - { > > - int ch = (x) != (oldx); > > @@ -1849,7 +1862,7 @@ m68k_illegitimate_symbolic_constant_p (r > > && !offset_within_block_p (base, INTVAL (offset))) > > return true; > > @@ -957,7 +941,7 @@ > > return orig; > > > > gcc_assert (reg); > > -@@ -2196,13 +2421,257 @@ legitimize_pic_address (rtx orig, enum m > > +@@ -2196,13 +2421,244 @@ legitimize_pic_address (rtx orig, enum m > > base == reg ? 0 : reg); > > > > if (GET_CODE (orig) == CONST_INT) > > @@ -1164,19 +1148,6 @@ > > + return orig; > > +} > > + > > -+/* Return true if X is a TLS symbol. */ > > -+ > > -+static bool > > -+m68k_tls_symbol_p (rtx x) > > -+{ > > -+ if (!TARGET_HAVE_TLS) > > -+ return false; > > -+ > > -+ if (GET_CODE (x) != SYMBOL_REF) > > -+ return false; > > -+ > > -+ return SYMBOL_REF_TLS_MODEL (x) != 0; > > -+} > > + > > +/* Helper for m68k_tls_referenced_p. */ > > + > > @@ -1414,6 +1385,18 @@ > > > > #define REG_OK_FOR_BASE_P(X) \ > > m68k_legitimate_base_reg_p (X, REG_STRICT_P) > > +@@ -777,7 +778,10 @@ __transfer_from_trampoline () > > \ > > + #define COPY_ONCE(Y) if (!copied) { Y = copy_rtx (Y); copied = ch = 1; } > > + #define LEGITIMIZE_ADDRESS(X,OLDX,MODE,WIN) \ > > + { register int ch = (X) != (OLDX); \ > > +- if (GET_CODE (X) == PLUS) \ > > ++ if (HAVE_AS_TLS && (GET_CODE (X) == SYMBOL_REF) && \ > > ++ (SYMBOL_REF_TLS_MODEL (X) != 0)) > > \ > > ++ m68k_legitimize_tls_address (X); \ > > ++ else if (GET_CODE (X) == PLUS) \ > > + { int copied = 0; \ > > + if (GET_CODE (XEXP (X, 0)) == MULT) \ > > + { COPY_ONCE (X); XEXP (X, 0) = force_operand (XEXP (X, 0), 0);} \ > > @@ -974,6 +975,9 @@ do { if (cc_prev_status.flags & CC_IN_68 > > assemble_name ((FILE), (NAME)), \ > > fprintf ((FILE), ",%u\n", (int)(ROUNDED))) > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in > > the body of a message to [email protected] > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > >
