From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28751 invoked by alias); 28 Apr 2009 13:11:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 28743 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Apr 2009 13:11:54 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,J_CHICKENPOX_52 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from e24smtp03.br.ibm.com (HELO e24smtp03.br.ibm.com) (32.104.18.24) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 13:11:47 +0000 Received: from mailhub1.br.ibm.com (mailhub1.br.ibm.com [9.18.232.109]) by e24smtp03.br.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n3SD5xdQ016673 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 10:05:59 -0300 Received: from d24av02.br.ibm.com (d24av02.br.ibm.com [9.18.232.47]) by mailhub1.br.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.2) with ESMTP id n3SDC4s21401258 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 10:12:04 -0300 Received: from d24av02.br.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d24av02.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id n3SDBgoL013329 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 10:11:42 -0300 Received: from [9.8.11.38] ([9.8.11.38]) by d24av02.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n3SDBfGn013294 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 28 Apr 2009 10:11:42 -0300 Subject: Re: [RFA] expand from SSA form (1/2) From: Luis Machado Reply-To: luisgpm@linux.vnet.ibm.com To: Michael Matz Cc: David Edelsohn , gcc-patches In-Reply-To: References: <303e1d290904270711s4c3d9ec3k5c0307bd99b9c90@mail.gmail.com> <303e1d290904270807g2dc51773y79d7f5b3e5a92d2a@mail.gmail.com> <303e1d290904271112l68094dbeq370e75624a12b1b2@mail.gmail.com> <1240878788.9380.6.camel@gargoyle> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 13:24:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1240924305.9380.9.camel@gargoyle> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-04/txt/msg02242.txt.bz2 Hi, > > Speaking about powerpc, i've tracked down a 19% degradation on cpu2000's > > 32-bit sixtrack and found that revision 146817 caused/revealed it. > > > > I'll have more details on it soon. > > It seems also x86_64 is affected, so anything you find is very welcome. > > If I may speculate it could be related to the half TER we're now doing. > As in, we're not feeding large trees to expand anymore, so there're no > opportunities to cleverly expand them to short insn sequences. For > cross-checking try to build with -fno-tree-ter (before the patch) and see > if it's resulting in the same slowdown. It results in some slowdown (~7%), but it's not as big as the one i've seen with the SSA patch. Regards, Luis