On 3/21/24 11:19 AM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
Oh yeah ! Robin hinted to this in Tues patchworks meeting too
default : 2,565,319,368,591
128 : 2,509,741,035,068
256 : 2,527,817,813,612
no-sched{,2}: 1,295,520,567,376
So one more nugget here. I happened to be doing some
On 3/22/24 05:29, Jeff Law wrote:
>> Another option is to enable -fsched-pressure which should help with
>> this issue.
> In theory we're already using that by default -- it's part of what makes
> me so curious to understand what's going on.
We are actually using it in practice :-)
Its the
On 3/22/24 2:47 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 8:56 PM Jeff Law wrote:
On 3/21/24 11:19 AM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
So if we go back to Robin's observation that scheduling dramatically
increases the instruction count, perhaps we try a run with
-fno-schedule-insns
On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 8:56 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
>
> On 3/21/24 11:19 AM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
>
> >>
> >> So if we go back to Robin's observation that scheduling dramatically
> >> increases the instruction count, perhaps we try a run with
> >> -fno-schedule-insns -fno-schedule-insns2 and see
On 3/21/24 12:56, Jeff Law wrote:
>
> On 3/21/24 11:19 AM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
>
>>> So if we go back to Robin's observation that scheduling dramatically
>>> increases the instruction count, perhaps we try a run with
>>> -fno-schedule-insns -fno-schedule-insns2 and see how the instruction
>>>
On 3/21/24 11:19 AM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
So if we go back to Robin's observation that scheduling dramatically
increases the instruction count, perhaps we try a run with
-fno-schedule-insns -fno-schedule-insns2 and see how the instruction
counts compare.
Oh yeah ! Robin hinted to this in
On 3/21/24 07:45, Jeff Law wrote:
The first patch is the main change which improves SPEC cactu by 10%.
>>> Just to confirm. Yup, 10% reduction in icounts and about a 3.5%
>>> improvement in cycles on our target. Which is great!
>>>
>>> This also makes me wonder if cactu is the benchmark
On 3/21/24 8:36 AM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
On 3/18/24 21:41, Jeff Law wrote:
On 3/16/24 11:35 AM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
Hi,
This set of patches (for gcc-15) help improve stack/array accesses
by improving constant materialization. Details are in respective
patches.
The first patch is the
On 3/18/24 21:41, Jeff Law wrote:
>
> On 3/16/24 11:35 AM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This set of patches (for gcc-15) help improve stack/array accesses
>> by improving constant materialization. Details are in respective
>> patches.
>>
>> The first patch is the main change which improves
