From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 7BA423858C60; Thu,  1 Dec 2022 16:33:05 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 7BA423858C60
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1669912385;
	bh=qJWCi/d4IdcA+vk5E3z1KsIcIdSaQvbXiWNFcwTeb/I=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=SlkDPWNVfOcMQhsBLbSjuD87jk7hvq60ff/pLSpTLD9t5K8zuVNLDsPfCWRkE4q2d
	 GvN5mcJ8EwaknTBRpI7Y8eLA7hzNwGWi99dISaMFCVH6EI1+O1e2R2VTLC4ZNt3bzU
	 wK5TiNE/B8luXm8l80nBnB5lpRuIgSguhhn2hN20=
From: "rvmallad at amazon dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/107413] Perf loss ~14% on 519.lbm_r SPEC
 cpu2017 benchmark with r8-7132-gb5b33e113434be
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2022 16:33:05 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rvmallad at amazon dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-107413-4-U6SqC0bhtn@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107413-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107413-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D107413

--- Comment #18 from Rama Malladi <rvmallad at amazon dot com> ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #17)
> (In reply to Rama Malladi from comment #16)
> > (In reply to Wilco from comment #15)
> > > (In reply to Rama Malladi from comment #14)
> > > > This fix also improved performance of 538.imagick_r by 15%. Did you=
 have a
> > > > similar observation? Thank you.
> > >=20
> > > No, but I was using -mcpu=3Dneoverse-n1 as my baseline. It's possible
> > > -mcpu=3Dneoverse-v1 shows larger speedups, what gain do you get on th=
e overall
> > > FP score?
> >=20
> > I was using -mcpu=3Dnative and run on a Neoverse V1 arch (Graviton3). H=
ere are
> > the scores I got (relative gains of latest mainline vs. an earlier main=
line).
> >=20
> > Latest mainline: 0976b012d89e3d819d83cdaf0dab05925b3eb3a0
> > Earlier mainline: f896c13489d22b30d01257bc8316ab97b3359d1c
>=20
> Right that's about 3 weeks of changes, I think
> 1b9a5cc9ec08e9f239dd2096edcc447b7a72f64a has improved imagick_r.
>=20
> > geomean	        1.03
>=20
> That's a nice gain in 3 weeks!

Yes, indeed :-) ... Thank you.=