public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com>
To: Craig Burley <burley@gnu.org>
Cc: pcg@goof.com, egcs@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: x86 double alignment (was egcs-1.1 release schedule)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 00:42:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <15921.899192115@hurl.cygnus.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <199806291534.LAA20147@melange.gnu.org>

  > So the question for 1.1 is: assuming we *can* make -mstack-align-double
  > the default (and my quick tests of it didn't seem too promising,
  > but then I realized some of that might be due to the g77 bugs I
  > think I've finally found and fixed as of a couple of hours ago),
  > *should* we for 1.1?  Should we default to as much as 300% speedups
  > in double-precision code and as much as 2-5% (?) slowdowns in
  > non-DP code, or continue "straining" to get the last few percentages
  > points for non-DP code at the *huge* (and embarrassing) expense of
  > DP code?
I think we need to answer this question once we've got some code to
get the stack and VAR_DECLs aligned properly so that we can measure
the benefit on some code *and* measure the loss on integer code.

We all have gut feelings about what we're going to find, but it would
really be to our advantage to get some hard data.

jeff

  reply	other threads:[~1998-06-30  0:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
1998-06-18  1:32 egcs-1.1 release schedule Jeffrey A Law
1998-06-19  9:02 ` Gerald Pfeifer
1998-06-19 23:47   ` Jeffrey A Law
1998-06-19 11:57 ` Dave Love
1998-06-21 21:43   ` Craig Burley
1998-06-21 23:07   ` Jeffrey A Law
1998-06-22  5:19     ` David S. Miller
1998-06-22 12:04       ` Dave Love
1998-06-22 13:45       ` Toon Moene
1998-06-22 22:29         ` Jeffrey A Law
1998-06-22 18:20       ` ix86 double alignment (was Re: egcs-1.1 release schedule) Craig Burley
1998-06-23  3:32         ` David S. Miller
1998-06-23  6:30           ` Craig Burley
1998-06-23  3:32         ` Jeffrey A Law
1998-06-23  5:13           ` Craig Burley
1998-06-22 12:04     ` egcs-1.1 release schedule Dave Love
1998-06-23  3:32       ` Jeffrey A Law
1998-06-23  9:29         ` H.J. Lu
1998-06-24 17:12           ` x86 double alignment (was egcs-1.1 release schedule) Marc Lehmann
1998-06-25  0:25             ` Jeffrey A Law
1998-06-28 18:02               ` Marc Lehmann
1998-06-25 12:33             ` PÃ¥l-Kristian Engstad
1998-06-28 18:02               ` Marc Lehmann
1998-06-25 21:48             ` Craig Burley
1998-06-25 18:53               ` Jeffrey A Law
1998-06-28 22:41               ` Marc Lehmann
1998-06-29  5:20                 ` Martin Kahlert
1998-06-29 11:08                   ` Jeffrey A Law
1998-06-29 19:43                   ` Craig Burley
1998-06-29 20:41                 ` Craig Burley
1998-06-30  0:42                   ` Jeffrey A Law [this message]
1998-06-30  8:19                     ` gcc2 merge H.J. Lu
1998-06-30 19:49                       ` Jeffrey A Law
1998-06-30  4:50                 ` x86 double alignment (was egcs-1.1 release schedule) Jeffrey A Law
1998-06-23  3:32       ` egcs-1.1 release schedule Craig Burley
1998-06-22 12:04     ` ix86 `double' alignment (was Re: egcs-1.1 release schedule) Craig Burley
1998-06-23  3:32       ` Jeffrey A Law
1998-06-23  5:13         ` Craig Burley
1998-06-24  2:28           ` Jeffrey A Law
1998-06-24 14:50             ` Craig Burley
1998-06-25  0:25               ` Jeffrey A Law
1998-06-25  9:59                 ` Tim Hollebeek
1998-06-28 18:01                 ` Marc Lehmann
1998-06-20  6:41 ` egcs-1.1 release schedule Gabriel Dos Reis
1998-06-20  9:22   ` Joe Buck
1998-06-20 15:36     ` Mark Mitchell
1998-06-21  0:07   ` Jeffrey A Law
1998-06-26  7:16 x86 double alignment (was egcs-1.1 release schedule) Michael Meissner

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=15921.899192115@hurl.cygnus.com \
    --to=law@cygnus.com \
    --cc=burley@gnu.org \
    --cc=egcs@cygnus.com \
    --cc=pcg@goof.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).