So are there any objections to enable this (PARAM_MAX_COMPLETELY_PEELED_INSNS increase from 100 to 120) for x86?
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Evgeny Stupachenko <evstu...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've measured spec2000, spec2006 as well and EEMBC for Silvermont in addition. > 100->120 change gives gain for Silvermont, the results on Haswell are flat. > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Eric Botcazou <ebotca...@adacore.com> wrote: >>> Agreed, I think the value of 100 was set decade ago by Zdenek and me >>> completely artifically. I do not recall any serious tuning of this flag. >> >> Are you talking bout PARAM_MAX_COMPLETELY_PEELED_INSNS here? If so, see: >> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-11/msg01193.html >> >> We have experienced performance regressions because of this arbitrary change >> and bumped it back to 200 unconditionally. >> >> -- >> Eric Botcazou
