From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9EDE13858C74 for ; Wed, 27 Sep 2023 05:07:45 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 9EDE13858C74 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com Received: from pps.filterd (m0353727.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 38R4ok6e028776; Wed, 27 Sep 2023 05:07:44 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : date : from : subject : to : cc : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=pp1; bh=MNwAv4iA3WRSpfIsZOQDHgUooyQ8xQlE65se/LD4aKQ=; b=ggad0EldTxLPGYKQ2kJ1OqToLgDtOq7TVNxViCJthrX6c8C4mSUUvyx2dg24NviRb4sm EkfOhGHLBn7K3i3+9fDgL2aYkUPpqYN+9jY6qf0oaqulSWk0syUEd7KV3455v2UctbK0 csXBojKNpNmbfGpzirVB+8VN3cHoEf3OlQAB3qgiSOjoe+4RXuuzyYkrYDFjySmwQ2zT 5LNrl6gAZbzNQVtOs2aXTECjcv+ZUnzNLwRtx7W2tB/r4Fg5my/THpHvZ89sye1kTD3C Tl3Aptdwqeiojd9PZYPJzttlWWBDAxHvmJwZVPtJRFUPvwXcJCkv8FuTz+LhglPxIgSD mg== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3tcdqj8e8d-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 27 Sep 2023 05:07:44 +0000 Received: from m0353727.ppops.net (m0353727.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 38R4vlGJ014939; Wed, 27 Sep 2023 05:07:43 GMT Received: from ppma23.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (5d.69.3da9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.61.105.93]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3tcdqj8e77-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 27 Sep 2023 05:07:43 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma23.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma23.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 38R407oc011029; Wed, 27 Sep 2023 05:07:42 GMT Received: from smtprelay04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com ([9.218.2.228]) by ppma23.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3tabukgpx6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 27 Sep 2023 05:07:42 +0000 Received: from smtpav06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com [10.20.54.105]) by smtprelay04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 38R57dx744237500 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 27 Sep 2023 05:07:39 GMT Received: from smtpav06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 169552004B; Wed, 27 Sep 2023 05:07:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id A053A20049; Wed, 27 Sep 2023 05:07:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.177.71.47] (unknown [9.177.71.47]) by smtpav06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Sep 2023 05:07:36 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2023 13:07:34 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.6.1 From: "Kewen.Lin" Subject: Re: [PATCH-1v2, rs6000] Enable SImode in FP registers on P7 [PR88558] To: HAO CHEN GUI Cc: Segher Boessenkool , David , Peter Bergner , gcc-patches References: <9d7a1744-a01c-b54f-5818-7772f0c06b9b@linux.ibm.com> <9d3194be-3799-ecf4-de6d-0339217117bf@linux.ibm.com> <7479abfd-83bc-ccff-202f-bee3168f1172@linux.ibm.com> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <7479abfd-83bc-ccff-202f-bee3168f1172@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: r_cXTb0rfKVZFePFMSyI773Li0g5bXgt X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: jL-ZTnT3WVnep4pLhue__9aB6vcIuJMd Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 0 URL was un-rewritten MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.267,Aquarius:18.0.980,Hydra:6.0.619,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2023-09-27_01,2023-09-26_01,2023-05-22_02 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 malwarescore=0 clxscore=1015 mlxlogscore=999 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2309180000 definitions=main-2309270041 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,KAM_SHORT,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Hi, on 2023/9/25 09:57, HAO CHEN GUI wrote: > Hi Kewen, > > 在 2023/9/18 15:34, Kewen.Lin 写道: >> hanks for checking! So for P7, this patch looks neutral, but for P8 and >> later, it may cause some few differences in code gen. I'm curious that how >> many total object files and different object files were checked and found >> on P8? > P8 with -O2, following object files are different. > 507.cactuBSSN_r datestamp.o > 511.povray_r colutils.o > 521.wrf_r module_cu_kfeta.fppized.o > 526.blender_r particle_edit.o > 526.blender_r glutil.o > 526.blender_r displist.o > 526.blender_r CCGSubSurf.o > > P8 with -O3, following object files are different. > 502.gcc_r ifcvt.o > 502.gcc_r rtlanal.o > 548.exchange2_r exchange2.fppized.o > 507.cactuBSSN_r datestamp.o > 511.povray_r colutils.o > 521.wrf_r module_bc.fppized.o > 521.wrf_r module_cu_kfeta.fppized.o > 526.blender_r particle_edit.o > 526.blender_r displist.o > 526.blender_r CCGSubSurf.o > 526.blender_r sketch.o > OK, it's concluded that the percentage of the total number of affected object files is quite small ... > > > >> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-February/612821.html >> I also wonder if it's easy to reduce some of them further as small test cases. >> >> Since xxlor is better than fmr at least on Power10, could you also evaluate >> the affected bmks on P10 (even P8/P9) to ensure no performance degradation? > There is no performance recession on P10/P9/P8. The detail data is listed on > internal issue. ... and no runtime performance impact as evaluated, so this patch looks good to me and thanks for further testing. Please wait for a week or so to see if Segher and David have comments. Thanks! BR, Kewen > > Thanks > Gui Haochen