On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Vladimir Yakovlev
wrote:
> Patch is attached.
>
> Thanks,
> Vladimir
>
> 2011-10-14 Yakovlev Vladimir vladimir.b.yakov...@intel.com
^ Should be in "<>".
>
> * gcc/config/i386/i386.c (atom_cost): Changed cost for loading
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Vladimir Yakovlev wrote:
> Could anyone checkin that?
Please provide a suitable patch which can be applied.
H.J.
> Thanks,
> Vladimir
>
> 2011/10/14 Uros Bizjak :
>> Hello!
>>
>>> This is a ping. Change affects Atom only and was made because it
>>> really gi
Could anyone checkin that?
Thanks,
Vladimir
2011/10/14 Uros Bizjak :
> Hello!
>
>> This is a ping. Change affects Atom only and was made because it
>> really gives better performance on this architecture. This fact
>> actually leads to the thought that old value is just a simple
>> misprint.
>>
>
Hello!
> This is a ping. Change affects Atom only and was made because it
> really gives better performance on this architecture. This fact
> actually leads to the thought that old value is just a simple
> misprint.
>
> > This patch fixes performance regression with -mtune=atom. Changing
> > atom
This is a ping. Change affects Atom only and was made because it
really gives better performance on this architecture. This fact
actually leads to the thought that old value is just a simple
misprint.
Please look.
Vladimir
2011/9/30 Vladimir Yakovlev :
> This patch fixes performance regression
This patch fixes performance regression with -mtune=atom. Changing
atom cost removes regression in several tests of EEMBC and spec2000.
Bootstrap amd make check Ok for both with and witout -mtune-atom.
OK for trunk?
2011-09-30 Yakovlev Vladimir vladimir.b.yakov...@intel.com
* gcc/config/i
