Author blaisorblade
Recipients ajaksu2, alexandre.vassalotti, bboissin, blaisorblade, christian.heimes, collinwinter, djc, facundobatista, gregory.p.smith, jyasskin, lemburg, pitrou, ralph.corderoy, rhettinger, skip.montanaro, theatrus
Date 2009-01-10.04:52:51
SpamBayes Score 0.00825678
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1231563174.76.0.123045258294.issue4753@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
@ ajaksu2
> Applying your patches makes no difference with gcc 4.2 and gives a
> barely noticeable (~2%) slowdown with icc.
"Your patches" is something quite unclear :-)
Which are the patch sets you are comparing?
And on 32 or 64 bits? But does Yonah supports 64bits? IIRC no, but I'm
not sure.
I would be surprised from slowdowns for restore-old-oparg-load.diff,
really surprised.
And I would be just surprised by slowdowns on
reenable-static-prediction.diff.
Also, about ICC output, we still need to ensure that it's properly
compiled (see above the instructions for counting "jmp *" or similar).
In the measurements above, ICC did miscompile the patch with the switch.
By "properly compiled" I mean that separate indirect branches are
generated, instead of just one.

> These results are from a
> Celeron M 410 (Core Solo Yonah-based), so it's a rather old platform to
> run benchmarks on.

Not really - at the very least we should listen to results on Pentium 4,
Core (i.e. Yonah) and Core 2, and I would also add Pentium3/Pentium M to
represent the P6 family.
Anyway, I have to do my benchmarks on this, I hope this weekend I'll
have time.
History
Date User Action Args
2009-01-10 04:52:55blaisorbladesetrecipients: + blaisorblade, lemburg, skip.montanaro, collinwinter, rhettinger, facundobatista, gregory.p.smith, pitrou, christian.heimes, ajaksu2, alexandre.vassalotti, jyasskin, djc, ralph.corderoy, bboissin, theatrus
2009-01-10 04:52:54blaisorbladesetmessageid: <1231563174.76.0.123045258294.issue4753@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2009-01-10 04:52:53blaisorbladelinkissue4753 messages
2009-01-10 04:52:51blaisorbladecreate