From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25170 invoked by alias); 30 Jun 2010 17:34:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 25157 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Jun 2010 17:34:56 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from tx2ehsobe003.messaging.microsoft.com (HELO TX2EHSOBE006.bigfish.com) (65.55.88.13) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:34:52 +0000 Received: from mail5-tx2-R.bigfish.com (10.9.14.239) by TX2EHSOBE006.bigfish.com (10.9.40.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.1.340.0; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:34:50 +0000 Received: from mail5-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail5-tx2-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C0CDC9828A; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:34:50 +0000 (UTC) X-SpamScore: 3 X-BigFish: VPS3(zdf5pz1432Nzz1202hzzz32i2a8h43h65h) X-Spam-TCS-SCL: 4:0 Received: from mail5-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail5-tx2 (MessageSwitch) id 1277919289995882_30228; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:34:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TX2EHSMHS028.bigfish.com (unknown [10.9.14.240]) by mail5-tx2.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC9ADFF0053; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:34:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ausb3extmailp01.amd.com (163.181.251.8) by TX2EHSMHS028.bigfish.com (10.9.99.128) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.0.482.44; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:34:49 +0000 Received: from ausb3twp01.amd.com ([163.181.250.37]) by ausb3extmailp01.amd.com (Switch-3.2.7/Switch-3.2.7) with SMTP id o5UHcOc7024760; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 12:38:27 -0500 X-M-MSG: Received: from sausexhtp01.amd.com (sausexhtp01.amd.com [163.181.3.165]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ausb3twp01.amd.com (Tumbleweed MailGate 3.7.2) with ESMTP id 2BB111028AA5; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 12:34:21 -0500 (CDT) Received: from SAUSEXMBP01.amd.com ([163.181.3.198]) by sausexhtp01.amd.com ([163.181.3.165]) with mapi; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 12:34:22 -0500 From: "Fang, Changpeng" To: Richard Guenther CC: Zdenek Dvorak , Christian Borntraeger , "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" , "uweigand@de.ibm.com" , "sebpop@gmail.com" Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:33:00 -0000 Subject: RE: [Patch PR 44576]: Reduce the computation cost in compute_miss_rate for prefetching loop arrays Message-ID: References: , In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Reverse-DNS: unknown 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: 2010-06/txt/msg03169.txt.bz2 > FOR_EACH_LOOP (li, loop, LI_ONLY_INNERMOST) >does that make a difference? This doesn't help, because "compute_all_dependences" was called the same nu= mber of time as before. (BTW, should we limit prefetching only to the innermost one?) In this test case, there are 6 large loops, where each loop has 729 memory = reference. It takes 4~5 seconds to "compute_all_dependence" for one such loop. > The patch passed Bootstrapping and regression tests. > > Is this patch OK to commit? >Ok. Thank you. Changpeng