From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-375993-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 19626 invoked by alias); 6 Dec 2011 11:46:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 19615 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Dec 2011 11:46:48 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Dec 2011 11:46:34 +0000
From: "dominiq at lps dot ens.fr" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/34501] The vector cost model does not seem suited for Intel Core2Duo
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 11:46:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Status Resolution
Message-ID: <bug-34501-4-7H8Cp6qtPc@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-34501-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-34501-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
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: 2011-12/txt/msg00559.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34501

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> 2011-12-06 11:45:39 UTC ---
Although I don't know if the cost model is perfectly tuned for the Intel
Core2Duo, the particular instance of this PR has been fixed since a long time
(see pr34265 and pr50904), on trunk at r182043, I now get on a slightly faster
proc (2.5Ghz vs. 2.1Ghz):

[macbook] lin/test% time gfc -O3 -ffast-math -funroll-loops induct.f90
7.969u 0.101s 0:08.07 99.8%    0+0k 0+40io 0pf+0w
[macbook] lin/test% time a.out > /dev/null
13.062u 0.026s 0:13.09 99.9%    0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
[macbook] lin/test% time gfc -O3 -ffast-math -funroll-loops induct.f90 --param
min-vect-loop-bound=2
7.965u 0.110s 0:08.08 99.8%    0+0k 0+23io 0pf+0w
[macbook] lin/test% time a.out > /dev/null
13.063u 0.027s 0:13.09 99.9%    0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w

So I am closing the PR as fixed. Thanks for all the work leading to a nice
speed-up.