From: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
To: Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz>
Cc: Pat Haugen <pthaugen@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Update default loop peel limits
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2012 09:05:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFiYyc20F4eKv0zBc22zEjrQehA5y5umYcyeY51Bj7V3fZY36A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121206214313.GG671@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:43 PM, Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz> wrote:
>> The following patch restores the old default limits for loop peeling
>> that were recently changed to 100 and caused a 20% degradation in
>> 454.calculix.
>>
>> Bootstrap/regtest on powerpc64-linux with no new regressions. Ok for trunk?
>>
>> -Pat
>>
>>
>> 2012-12-06 Pat Haugen <pthaugen@us.ibm.com>
>> * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_option_override_internal): Set
>> default loop peeling limits.
>
> Actually the calculix regression is also seen on core.
> Igor was looking into what loops got slower and why. Either we can fix that partiuclar
> loop or revert to the old default (that sadly causes quite a lot of code bloat)
Well, as the patch regressed the testcase in put in the testsuite for calculix
that is no surprise... gfortran.dg/reassoc_4.f. The fix for the testcase was to
increase the limit with a --param :/
Note that it is even beneficial to unroll two more levels of the nest
completely.
It's just an insane testcase (and I spent quite some time on it trying to
somehow autodetect the simplification opportunities - see the unrolling
heuristic rewrite patch I dumped on you a few weeks ago).
No advice from me on how to "fix" this ... but eventually the rewrite restores
the old behavior with the new limits (I did the rewrite to try to somehow make
it do two extra levels of nest unrolling ...).
Richard.
> Honza
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-07 9:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-06 20:16 Pat Haugen
2012-12-06 20:17 ` David Edelsohn
2012-12-06 21:43 ` Jan Hubicka
2012-12-07 9:05 ` Richard Biener [this message]
2012-12-07 16:43 ` Jan Hubicka
2012-12-07 16:52 ` Michael Matz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAFiYyc20F4eKv0zBc22zEjrQehA5y5umYcyeY51Bj7V3fZY36A@mail.gmail.com \
--to=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
--cc=dje.gcc@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=hubicka@ucw.cz \
--cc=pthaugen@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).