From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15404 invoked by alias); 19 Jan 2004 17:04:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 15391 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2004 17:04:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz) (195.113.18.106) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Jan 2004 17:04:29 -0000 Received: from camelot.ms.mff.cuni.cz (kampanus.ms.mff.cuni.cz [195.113.18.107]) by nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix) with SMTP id 0A8F64DED4; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 18:04:30 +0100 (CET) Received: by camelot.ms.mff.cuni.cz (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 19 Jan 2004 18:04:31 +0100 Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 17:04:00 -0000 From: Jan Hubicka To: Vladimir Makarov Cc: Jan Hubicka , Robert Dewar , Jan Hubicka , Marc Espie , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: gcc 3.5 integration branch proposal Message-ID: <20040119170431.GR7878@kam.mff.cuni.cz> References: <20040110154129.GA28152@disaster.jaj.com> <1073935323.3458.42.camel@minax.codesourcery.com> <1073951351.3458.162.camel@minax.codesourcery.com> <20040119034216.0593F48A4@quatramaran.ens.fr> <20040119112943.GF31365@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <400BE5F7.8020907@gnat.com> <20040119141825.GQ7878@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <400BEE5F.76D36B1C@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <400BEE5F.76D36B1C@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg01301.txt.bz2 > Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > > > Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > > > > >This is precisely what I intend to do now, yes. > > > >I re-did your experiment on my notebook (Centrino, 256MB ram) > > > > > > It's useful to give the exact configuration, in particular the processor > > > speed. Note that by the way Centrino does NOT designate a processor, but > > > rather a system including specific wifi support, though it implies the > > > Pentium-M. That's a very different core than the Pentium-4 or Pentium-4M > > > so it is useful to repeat such measurements on the latter machines. > > > > My CPU is Pentium-M 1.3Mhz with speedstep disabled, tought it seems to > > me that only interesting about it is particular CPU core that is mostly > > Pentium-3 and memory/CPU speed ratio that I unforutnately don't know > > offhand. > > > > I've started work on tuning gcc to Pentium-M. It is not a exactly > Pentium 3 core. Although it has constraints on insn issue analogous to > Pentium-pro. Also it looks like pentium-m has a multiplier from > pentium-3 too. Because the frequency processor is quite different from > pentium4, the memory/CPU speed ratio is also different. Actually I did other tests posted to the list earlier. First was about Gerald's C++ testcase that was done on 1.7Mhz Athlon XP 2100+ and other was SPEC2000 runs 1.6Mhz Opteron. Both were consistent with the results I got there showing speedup relative to GCC 3.0 and 3.3 (hammer branch) repsectivly. So I believe that the particular chip has relatively small impact about the numbers. I can't access Pentium4 based system. Honza > > Vlad