From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-219389-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 3299 invoked by alias); 25 May 2007 17:10:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 3170 invoked by uid 48); 25 May 2007 17:09:43 -0000
Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 17:10:00 -0000
Subject: [Bug target/32086]  New: 10% to 20% Performance Regression Between 4.1.3 and 4.3
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
Message-ID: <bug-32086-13404@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
From: "burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2007-05/txt/msg02254.txt.bz2

The program induct.f90 of the Polyhedron testsuite,
http://www.polyhedron.co.uk/pb05/polyhedron_benchmark_suite.html, runs about
10% slower under 4.3 than under 4.1.3 (20070430 prerelease SUSE Linux).

A cut-down testcase "test2.f90 (attachment 13611 of PR 32084) shows the same
result. At least for the testcase, the original tree is almost identical for
4.3 and 4.1.3 which means that the difference must be the middle or backend.

Timings (w/o "volatile"):

a) gfortran -march=opteron -ffast-math -funroll-loops -ftree-vectorize
-ftree-loop-linear -msse3 -O3

induct.f90: 51.65 [100%] vs 46.94 [ 90%] for gfortran 4.3 vs. 4.1.3
test2.f90:   4.60 [100%] vs  4.18 [ 91%]

b) gfortran -m32 -march=opteron -ffast-math -funroll-loops -ftree-vectorize
-ftree-loop-linear -O3

induct.f90: 61.41 [100%] vs 46.94 [ 76%]
test2.f90:   5.45 [100%] vs  4.54 [ 83%]

c) gfortran -m32 -march=opteron -ffast-math -funroll-loops -ftree-vectorize
-ftree-loop-linear -msse3 -mfpmath=sse -O3

induct.f90: 46.12 [100%] vs 46.94 [102%]  (4.3 is better :-)
test2.f90:   4.14 [100%] vs  3.96 [ 96%]

(For the other polyhedron test cases, the performance loss is less: tfft 4%
slower, protein 3%, doduc 3%, channel 2%; in total 4.3 is faster, for fatigue
4.1.3 takes twice as long as 4.3. See:
http://physik.fu-berlin.de/~tburnus/gcc-trunk/benchmark/#rt)


-- 
           Summary: 10% to 20% Performance Regression Between 4.1.3 and 4.3
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.3.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: target
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
OtherBugsDependingO 32084
             nThis:


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32086