--- Comment #11 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-09 09:00 ---
[Move comment from IRC #gcc to bugzilla]
(In reply to comment #9)
For what it is worth, on AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ / x86-64-linux, [...]
That's a +16% increase in run-time with -fwhole-program.
(In reply to
--- Comment #9 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-08 21:00 ---
For what it is worth, on AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ / x86-64-linux, I get for
gfortran -O3 -ffast-math -march=native -- and with with and without -flto:
0m45.132s -- (options as above)
0m52.731s -- additionally
--- Comment #10 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-08 21:04
---
So hot-bb-frequency-fraction solves the whole regression?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #8 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-06-05 09:52 ---
At revision 160309, I get
[macbook] lin/test% gfc -O3 -ffast-math -funroll-loops -fomit-frame-pointer
-fwhole-program -flto rnflow.f90 --param hot-bb-frequency-fraction=1000
[macbook] lin/test% time a.out /dev/null
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-30 18:09 ---
Insufficient analysis. This more sounds like a dup of profile-estimate
messed up by inlining.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-05-30 18:10 ---
Created an attachment (id=20780)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20780action=view)
Assembly generated with -O3 -ffast-math -funroll-loops -fomit-frame-pointer
-flto and revision 159851
--
--- Comment #4 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-05-30 18:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=20781)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20781action=view)
Assembly generated with -O3 -ffast-math -funroll-loops -fomit-frame-pointer
-flto and revision 159852
--
--- Comment #5 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-05-30 18:30 ---
Output of gprof on darwin:
Revision 159851:
called/total parents
index %timeself descendents called+selfname index
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-30 18:48 ---
0.0 0.00 0.00 5572994 0.00 0.00 _xerbla_ [154]
eh? that's the blas error handler. something is fishy with your setup.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #7 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-05-30 18:55 ---
Insufficient analysis. This more sounds like a dup of profile-estimate
messed up by inlining.
Do you mean a dup of pr40106? Or is there others I am not aware of?
eh? that's the blas error handler. something
10 matches
Mail list logo
