From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 54901 invoked by alias); 29 Sep 2016 15:38:50 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 54872 invoked by uid 89); 29 Sep 2016 15:38:49 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=heads-up!, noticeable, headsup, degradations X-HELO: foss.arm.com Received: from foss.arm.com (HELO foss.arm.com) (217.140.101.70) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 15:38:48 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DBD029; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 08:38:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.2.207.77] (e100706-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.2.207.77]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 672E33F21A; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 08:38:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <57ED3585.8090009@foss.arm.com> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 16:10:00 -0000 From: Kyrill Tkachov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pat Haugen , Bill Schmidt CC: GCC Patches , Richard Biener Subject: Re: [PATCH][v4] GIMPLE store merging pass References: <57EBE7A6.3040103@foss.arm.com> <0BED6BB0-4196-4086-919E-EEDDA5923FFF@linux.vnet.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-09/txt/msg02264.txt.bz2 On 29/09/16 16:37, Pat Haugen wrote: > On 09/28/2016 10:59 AM, Bill Schmidt wrote: >>> Bill, could you or someone else with access to Power benchmarking try this patch out on some benchmarks >>>> that you usually use? The new pass in this patch is on by default and can be turned off by -fno-store-merging >>>> if needed. Jakub indicated that his last attempt at this work caused regressions on powerpc so I'd like to >>>> see if this patch is okay in that regard. >> Hi Kyrill, >> >> Thanks for the heads-up! I will have someone on my team look at this as soon as possible. >> > I tried the patch on SPEC2006 on powerpc64le and the results were neutral, no noticeable improvements or degradations. Thanks for checking. Much appreciated Kyrill > -Pat >