From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 429113857C4A; Thu, 7 Mar 2024 11:09:51 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 429113857C4A DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1709809791; bh=FIv+meDbZVZQTLpZHIzWGsyOc619+jXdaWM/uAgDhVY=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=V2CiISNO116xHbbltGEns5yyiaCAswP7WIj0zUCNxRRLqlCBC6CWfWh3Uvok0vBVr VdHNDoaZqseK9Tj6CZS2vVoyiFAViVvPa5LRmAhar+FKq5BHGwnwil0Y5RMlRngY/O CERkAKN/f0zG7LR9k4wlLYmSpKYsoS/FDwiQWJww= From: "xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/112919] LoongArch: Alignments in tune parameters are not precise and they regress performance Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2024 11:09:49 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: target X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D112919 --- Comment #15 from Xi Ruoyao --- > Hi=EF=BC=8CRuoyao: >=20 > The results of spec2006 on 3A6000 were obtained, I removed the more vola= tile > test items, '-falign-loops=3D8 -falign-functions=3D8 -falign-jumps=3D32 > -falign-lables=3D4' this set of parameters got the highest score. This is= the > same combination of parameters as the coremark tested by Xu Chenghua. >=20 > The test of the 3A5000 will also be completed around the 15th of this mon= th, > so I want to change the code after the test results of the 3a5000 are out. > What do you think? Ok to me. I'm getting some different results on LA664: 22031.284424 Compiler flags : -O2 -falign-labels=3D4 -falign-functions=3D8 -falign-loops=3D8 -falign-jumps=3D32 -DPERFORMANCE_RUN=3D1 -lrt vs the "best" one: 22075.055188 Compiler flags : -O2 -falign-labels=3D4 -falign-functions=3D32 -falign-loops=3D16 -falign-jumps=3D8 -DPERFORMANCE_RUN=3D1 -lrt maybe such a 0.1% difference is some random fluctuation, or hardware or ker= nel configuration difference anyway.=