From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13546 invoked by alias); 28 Oct 2014 21:57:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 13490 invoked by uid 55); 28 Oct 2014 21:57:02 -0000 From: "manu at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/44054] Handle -Werror, -Werror=, -fdiagnostics-show-option, !GCC$ diagnostic (pragmas) and color Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 22:17:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.6.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: manu at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW 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 X-SW-Source: 2014-10/txt/msg02207.txt.bz2 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D44054 --- Comment #17 from Manuel L=C3=B3pez-Ib=C3=A1=C3=B1ez --- Author: manu Date: Tue Oct 28 21:56:24 2014 New Revision: 216812 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=3D216812&root=3Dgcc&view=3Drev Log: 2014-10-28 Manuel L=C3=B3pez-Ib=C3=A1=C3=B1ez PR fortran/44054 * gfortran.h (gfc_warning_cmdline): Rename as gfc_warning_now_2. (gfc_error_cmdline): Rename as gfc_error_now_2. * error.c (gfc_diagnostic_build_locus_prefix): Remove trailing space. (gfc_diagnostic_starter): Add space between locus and prefix. (gfc_warning_now_2): Renamed from gfc_warning_cmdline. (gfc_error_now_2): Renamed from gfc_error_cmdline. * scanner.c (add_path_to_list): Use gfc_warning_now_2. (load_line): Likewise. (load_file): Likewise. * options.c (gfc_post_options): Update all renamed functions. Modified: trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fortran/error.c trunk/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h trunk/gcc/fortran/options.c trunk/gcc/fortran/scanner.c >>From gcc-bugs-return-465187-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Oct 28 22:17:07 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 22511 invoked by alias); 28 Oct 2014 22:17:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 22449 invoked by uid 48); 28 Oct 2014 22:17:01 -0000 From: "wdijkstr at arm dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/63503] [AArch64] A57 executes fused multiply-add poorly in some situations Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 22:40:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: target X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: wdijkstr at arm dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING 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: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2014-10/txt/msg02208.txt.bz2 Content-length: 1204 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63503 --- Comment #22 from Wilco --- (In reply to Evandro from comment #21) > (In reply to ramana.radhakrishnan@arm.com from comment #20) > > What's the kind of performance delta you see if you managed to unroll > > the loop just a wee bit ? Probably not much looking at the code produced > > here. > > Comparing the cycle counts on Juno when running the program from the matrix > multiplication test above built with -Ofast and unrolling: > > -fno-unroll-loops: 592000 > -funroll-loops --param max-unroll-times=2: 594000 > -funroll-loops --param max-unroll-times=4: 592000 > -funroll-loops: 590000 (implies --param max-unroll-times=8) > -funroll-loops --param max-unroll-times=16: 581000 > > It seems to me that without effective iv-opt in place, loops have to be > unrolled too aggressively to make any difference in this case, greatly > sacrificing code size. Unrolling alone isn't good enough in sum reductions. As I mentioned before, GCC doesn't enable any of the useful loop optimizations by default. So add -fvariable-expansion-in-unroller to get a good speedup with unrolling. Again these are all generic GCC issues.