From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 469F83858C53; Sat, 9 Dec 2023 17:52:26 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 469F83858C53 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1702144346; bh=PsFpByiVKcWOy318fQOZAiuPAf9kcrWTzFKNeAKnXgM=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=KC2pD7BbJhYjaZaqZ0QDCdgxSAaiePthXC/ZLpUCvMBi5jDzleOvJlZIXygBWwiWY X72WjWuJ1qe6efiOxx+r3CR6Cgg9pqY2A1Tn5Q8ClgSunEBsLPvXC5iL6xl/k9dH/p HH9seQVaRR+hpv63q04wn23a16NLT3rBDQxLjD/s= 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: Sat, 09 Dec 2023 17:52:25 +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 #2 from Xi Ruoyao --- On LA464: 13095 with GCC 13.2.0 The best I've got is: 12639 with GCC 14.0.0 + -falign-loops=3D8 -falign-labels=3D4 -falign-jumps= =3D4 -falign-functions=3D16 and I cannot really explain why this is the best. With the default: 12592 with GCC 14.0.0 So on LA464 the default seems not so bad...=