public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug target/94400] New: 531.deepsjeng_r is 7% slower at -O2 -march=znver2 than GCC 9
@ 2020-03-30 10:04 jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
  2020-03-30 10:10 ` [Bug target/94400] " marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
  2021-02-04 16:47 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-03-30 10:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94400

            Bug ID: 94400
           Summary: 531.deepsjeng_r is 7% slower at -O2 -march=znver2 than
                    GCC 9
           Product: gcc
           Version: 10.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: target
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
                CC: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
            Blocks: 26163
  Target Milestone: ---
              Host: x86_64-linux
            Target: x86_64-linux

When compiled with -O2 -march=native and run on an AMD Zen2 CPU,
531.deepsjeng_r runs about 7% slower.  This can be bisected to a
single commit:

commit a9a4edf0e71bbac9f1b5dcecdcf9250111d16889
Author: Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz>
Date:   Sat Nov 30 22:25:24 2019 +0100

    Update max_bb_count in execute_fixup_cfg

            * tree-cfg.c (execute_fixup_cfg): Update also max_bb_count when
            scaling happen.

    From-SVN: r278879

Surprisingly, I cannot see a similar problem on an Intel Cascade Lake
server CPU, but I have confirmed the above on two different Rome
systems (one running SLES, one openSUSE Tumbleweed).


Referenced Bugs:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
[Bug 26163] [meta-bug] missed optimization in SPEC (2k17, 2k and 2k6 and 95)

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* [Bug target/94400] 531.deepsjeng_r is 7% slower at -O2 -march=znver2 than GCC 9
  2020-03-30 10:04 [Bug target/94400] New: 531.deepsjeng_r is 7% slower at -O2 -march=znver2 than GCC 9 jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-03-30 10:10 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
  2021-02-04 16:47 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-03-30 10:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94400

Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
                 CC|                            |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2020-03-30
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW

--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I can confirm on LNT znver2 machine, but the bisection points to a different
commit:
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=324.387.0&plot.1=311.387.0&plot.2=348.387.0&plot.3=280.387.0&plot.4=297.387.0&

while LNT znver1 machine is not affected and the speed is similar to GCC 9:
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=145.387.0&plot.1=49.387.0&plot.2=79.387.0&plot.3=259.387.0&plot.4=29.387.0&

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* [Bug target/94400] 531.deepsjeng_r is 7% slower at -O2 -march=znver2 than GCC 9
  2020-03-30 10:04 [Bug target/94400] New: 531.deepsjeng_r is 7% slower at -O2 -march=znver2 than GCC 9 jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
  2020-03-30 10:10 ` [Bug target/94400] " marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-02-04 16:47 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-02-04 16:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94400

Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

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

--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The regression dropped to 1.9% according to my own measurements which also
match LNT (linked above).  It is peculiar to an unusual option combination,
specific to Zen2 (I cannot see it on Zen3 or CascadeLake) and so I think it is
unreasonable to expect that anybody will actually want to work on it.  And the
PR really is mostly fixed, so let me close it as such.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-02-04 16:47 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-03-30 10:04 [Bug target/94400] New: 531.deepsjeng_r is 7% slower at -O2 -march=znver2 than GCC 9 jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-03-30 10:10 ` [Bug target/94400] " marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-04 16:47 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org

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).