> On Jul 31, 2018, at 11:55 AM, Henry Bent <henry.r.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 31 July 2018 at 11:49, Timothe Litt <l...@ieee.org> wrote:
>
> On 31-Jul-18 10:08, Paul Koning wrote:
>>> On Jul 31, 2018, at 9:33 AM, Robert Armstrong <b...@jfcl.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> FWIW, this may also say something about the quality of the code generation
>>> in gcc for ARM vs x86 processors, or it may even say something about the
>>> relative efficiency of those two architectures.
>> One thing worth doing is to use the latest gcc. Code generation keeps
>> improving, and it's likely that architectures such as ARM see significant
>> benefits in newer releases.
>>
>> ...
>
> I did a writeup a while back about various compilers and SIMH on x86, here is
> the link from the archive:
> http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/pipermail/simh/2015-December/014102.html
>
> Profile-guided feedback is extremely helpful for SIMH. If you are able to
> recompile SIMH for your workload using feedback, the gains are extremely
> significant.
Interesting, and not too surprising. Given that, it may be useful to use a
recent GCC which supports LTO -- Link Time Optimization. That's a scheme that
allows whole-program optimization, rather than the normal per-sourcefile
optimization.
paul
_______________________________________________
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
