From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13888 invoked by alias); 6 Apr 2005 17:41:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 13729 invoked by alias); 6 Apr 2005 17:41:39 -0000 Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 17:41:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20050406174139.13728.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "law at redhat dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20050206175258.19794.kazu@cs.umass.edu> References: <20050206175258.19794.kazu@cs.umass.edu> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/19794] [meta-bug] Jump threading related bugs X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2005-04/txt/msg00681.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-04-06 17:41 ------- Subject: Re: [meta-bug] Jump threading related bugs On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 06:38 +0000, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > ------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-06 06:38 ------- > (In reply to comment #7) > > They don't even bear-out on other x86 platforms -- my older P3 and AMD > > boxes don't show the same kind of big improvement (they show a small > > improvements). However, both of my P4s show big improvements. > > Huh, both of those targets are still x86. And my point was that the improvement from everything I've managed to gather so far is either specific to the P4 or possibly specific to the size of the cache on the P4. > So what about on say Power4 or PowerPC 970? I don't have either of those. My non-x86 boxes are all, err, old. My PPC I think is a 233MHZ PPC750. It'd probably take more than I day to get things built and running on that ancient box. I only use it to diagnose PPC specific problems. jeff -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19794