From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <Paul.Zimmermann@inria.fr>
Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr
 (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39F10385803E
 for <gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org>; Tue,  3 May 2022 08:28:40 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 39F10385803E
Received-SPF: SoftFail (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr:
 domain of Paul.Zimmermann@inria.fr is inclined to not
 designate 152.81.10.51 as permitted sender)
 identity=mailfrom; client-ip=152.81.10.51;
 receiver=mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr;
 envelope-from="Paul.Zimmermann@inria.fr";
 x-sender="Paul.Zimmermann@inria.fr"; x-conformance=spf_only;
 x-record-type="v=spf1"; x-record-text="v=spf1
 ip4:192.134.164.0/24 mx ~all"
Received-SPF: None (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
 authenticity information available from domain of
 postmaster@tomate) identity=helo; client-ip=152.81.10.51;
 receiver=mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr;
 envelope-from="Paul.Zimmermann@inria.fr";
 x-sender="postmaster@tomate"; x-conformance=spf_only
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.91,194,1647298800"; d="scan'208";a="34414172"
Received: from tomate.loria.fr (HELO tomate) ([152.81.10.51])
 by mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with
 ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 May 2022 10:28:39 +0200
Date: Tue, 03 May 2022 10:28:39 +0200
Message-Id: <mw1qxbc954.fsf@tomate.loria.fr>
From: Paul Zimmermann <Paul.Zimmermann@inria.fr>
To: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
CC: sibid@uvic.ca, stephane.glondu@inria.fr
Subject: slowdown with -std=gnu18 with respect to -std=c99
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,
 DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, KAM_NUMSUBJECT, SPF_HELO_NONE,
 SPF_PASS, TXREP,
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-help mailing list <gcc-help.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-help>,
 <mailto:gcc-help-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-help/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-help-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-help>,
 <mailto:gcc-help-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 May 2022 08:28:42 -0000

       Hi,

I observe a slowdown of some code compiled with gcc when I use -std=gnu18
instead of -std=c99.

My computer is a i5-4590, and I use gcc version 11.3.0 (Debian 11.3.0-1).

To reproduce:

$ git clone https://gitlab.inria.fr/core-math/core-math.git
$ cd core-math
$ CORE_MATH_PERF_MODE=rdtsc CFLAGS="-O3 -march=native -ffinite-math-only -std=gnu18" ./perf.sh exp10f
GNU libc version: 2.33
GNU libc release: release
31.746
11.780
$ CORE_MATH_PERF_MODE=rdtsc CFLAGS="-O3 -march=native -ffinite-math-only -std=c99" ./perf.sh exp10f
GNU libc version: 2.33
GNU libc release: release
21.514
11.751

The difference is seen between the first figures in each run (31.746 and
21.514), which indicate the average number of cycles of the exp10f function
from the core-math library.

The code is very simple (a few dozen lines):

https://gitlab.inria.fr/core-math/core-math/-/blob/master/src/binary32/exp10/exp10f.c

Some more remarks:

* this slowdown does not happen on all machines, for example it does not
  appear on an AMD EPYC 7282 with gcc gcc version 10.2.1 (Debian 10.2.1-6).

* this slowdown disappears when I replace __builtin_expect(ex>(127+6), 0)
  by ex>(127+6) at line 45 of the code, however that branch is never taken
  in the above experiment.

Does anyone have a clue?

Best regards,
Paul Zimmermann