Ping?
David
On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
Hi, GCC/i386 currently has about 73 boolean parameters/knobs (defined
in ix86_tune_features[], indexed by ix86_tune_indices) to perform
micro-arch specific performance tuning. However such settings are
Ping?
David
On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
Hi, GCC/i386 currently has about 73 boolean parameters/knobs (defined
in ix86_tune_features[], indexed by ix86_tune_indices) to perform
micro-arch specific performance tuning. However such
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
Ping?
David
On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com
wrote:
Hi, GCC/i386 currently has about 73 boolean parameters/knobs (defined
in ix86_tune_features[], indexed by ix86_tune_indices) to
On Sun, 4 Aug 2013, Andi Kleen wrote:
Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com writes:
The patch fails to add documentation.
That seems like a feature, it's likely not useful for the general
public. More for specialized tools that automatically search
for the best tuning.
If such a
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Sun, 4 Aug 2013, Andi Kleen wrote:
Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com writes:
The patch fails to add documentation.
That seems like a feature, it's likely not useful for the general
public. More for
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 4:40 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
Hi, GCC/i386 currently has about 73 boolean parameters/knobs (defined
in ix86_tune_features[],
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:26 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 4:40 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
Hi, GCC/i386 currently has
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:26 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 4:40 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com
ok -- makes sense. This can be done as a follow up patch.
thanks,
David
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 10:59 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:26 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun,
Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
Hi, GCC/i386 currently has about 73 boolean parameters/knobs (defined
in ix86_tune_features[], indexed by ix86_tune_indices) to perform
micro-arch specific performance tuning. However such settings are hard
coded (fixed with a given -mtune setting) and
Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com writes:
The patch fails to add documentation.
That seems like a feature, it's likely not useful for the general
public. More for specialized tools that automatically search
for the best tuning.
And I am nervous about testing
coverage - is this
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 4:40 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
Hi, GCC/i386 currently has about 73 boolean parameters/knobs (defined
in ix86_tune_features[], indexed by ix86_tune_indices) to perform
micro-arch specific performance
Hi, GCC/i386 currently has about 73 boolean parameters/knobs (defined
in ix86_tune_features[], indexed by ix86_tune_indices) to perform
micro-arch specific performance tuning. However such settings are hard
coded (fixed with a given -mtune setting) and is very hard to do
performance experiment.
13 matches
Mail list logo
