public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug rtl-optimization/33716] New: gcc generates suboptimal code for long long shifts
@ 2007-10-09 16:20 felix-gcc at fefe dot de
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: felix-gcc at fefe dot de @ 2007-10-09 16:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
Consider this function:
unsigned long long x(unsigned long long l) {
return l >> 4;
}
gcc will use the shrd instruction here, which is much slower than doing it "by
hand" on at least Athlon, Pentium 3, VIA C3. On Core 2 shrd appears to be
faster.
On my Athlon 64, I measured 350 cycles vs 441 for a loop of 100.
On my Core 2, I measured 672 cycles vs 624.
So, my suggestion is: if -march= is set to Pentium 3 or a non-Intel CPU, don't
use shrd and shrl.
My benchmark program is on http://dl.fefe.de/shrd.c
--
Summary: gcc generates suboptimal code for long long shifts
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: felix-gcc at fefe dot de
GCC build triplet: i386-pc-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i386-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i386-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33716
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2007-10-09 16:20 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-10-09 16:20 [Bug rtl-optimization/33716] New: gcc generates suboptimal code for long long shifts felix-gcc at fefe dot de
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).