https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72517
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #12) > On July 27, 2016 7:02:07 PM GMT+02:00, "Amit.Pawar at amd dot com" > <gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > >https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72517 > > > >--- Comment #11 from Amit Pawar <Amit.Pawar at amd dot com> --- > >Improvement is seen but not same as best one. > > > > > >Current scores are > >Flags Latest trunk > >O3 :31.4 > >O3 -march=bdver4 :31.1 > >Ofast :32.1 > >Ofast -march=bdver4 :31.2 > > > >but good one. > >Flags Good Trunk > >O3 37.69 > >O3 bdver4 36.55 > >Ofast 40.36 > >Ofast bdver4 38.31 > > > >Can you please check at your end? > > I checked r237473 plus the patch against r237472 and the regression was > fully fixed. I did not yet check current trunk but if there is any > regression it is a new one caused by sth else. Bisection with the fix for > this regression might tell. Double-checking against trunk, thus base is r237472 and peak is r238807 I get 436.cactusADM 11950 320 37.3 * 11950 318 37.5 * for -Ofast -march=native (three-run result). This is FAM 21 Model 96 Stepping 1 detected as bdver4 by GCC.
