From: Kevin Atkinson <kevina@gnu.org>
To: Robert Dewar <dewar@gnat.com>
Cc: Peter.Sasi@t-systems.co.hu, <aj@suse.de>, <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
<tjw@omnigroup.com>
Subject: Re: [GCC 3.x] Performance testing for QA
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 14:05:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0209031659490.26207-100000@kevin-pc.atkinson.dhs.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020903205525.B8861F2941@nile.gnat.com>
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Robert Dewar wrote:
> <<The type of operations that encoder decoders use (lots of arithmetic and
> data movement) should somehow be incorporate as a benchmark test gcc
> should optimize for. The ideal goal would be to make the code fast enough
> that hand written assembly would not be necessary. Thus using an encoder as
> a benchmark would be beneficial. Even if it concentrates on tight loops.
> >>
>
> You need to remember that it is trivial to make a compiler make any ONE
> simple program as fast as optimal assembly language.
Than you need to use a wide variety of encoders to avoid this problem.
Also since the source code for gcc is freely available such a thing will
not go unnoticed for long. I seams that you are trying to say that making
tight loops run fast is a pointless exercise by the compiler. If a large
number of programs tend to use a particular type of loop than optimizing
for those loops would be a huge win in terms of performance.
---
http://kevin.atkinson.dhs.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-09-03 21:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-03 13:55 Robert Dewar
2002-09-03 14:05 ` Kevin Atkinson [this message]
2002-09-03 14:12 ` Dale Johannesen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-09-03 14:25 Robert Dewar
2002-09-03 14:15 Robert Dewar
2002-09-03 13:56 Robert Dewar
2002-09-03 13:36 Robert Dewar
2002-09-03 13:41 ` Kevin Atkinson
2002-09-03 13:25 Robert Dewar
2002-09-03 13:31 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-09-03 14:28 ` Jan Hubicka
2002-09-02 15:50 Robert Dewar
2002-09-02 15:49 Robert Dewar
2002-09-03 10:32 ` Dale Johannesen
2002-09-03 11:17 ` Kevin Atkinson
2002-09-02 14:47 Robert Dewar
2002-09-02 15:42 ` Timothy J. Wood
2002-09-02 6:12 Sasi Péter
2002-09-02 14:08 ` Andreas Jaeger
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=Pine.LNX.4.44.0209031659490.26207-100000@kevin-pc.atkinson.dhs.org \
--to=kevina@gnu.org \
--cc=Peter.Sasi@t-systems.co.hu \
--cc=aj@suse.de \
--cc=dewar@gnat.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=tjw@omnigroup.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).