On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Ricardo Telichevesky wrote:
> Hello Renato, thanks for your reply, sorry about the confusion with
> compilers - since there is a "clang" in the mac, I thought gcc was gcc..
> After your suggestion, I modified the code, and installed a bona fide gcc
> compiler in th
Hello Renato, thanks for your reply, sorry about the confusion with compilers - since there is a "clang" in the mac, I thought gcc was gcc.. After your suggestion, I modified the code, and installed a bona fide gcc compiler in the Mac I got more data that is kind of interesting, wanted to share
On 23 January 2015 at 16:07, Ricardo Telichevesky wrote:
> gcc: Apple LLVM version 5.1 (clang-503.0.40) (based on LLVM 3.4svn) - don't
> know what that means expected a number like 4.2.1 or something like that,
> 2.53 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Hi Ricardo,
This is not gcc at all, it's Clang+LLVM. :/
Thanks Richard for your input, much appreciated.
I followed up on your suggestions; unfortunately the -Wdisabled-optimization option you suggested did not cause any warnings. Still trying one by one the --params options without success. I got a new hint, though, running the same examples on a
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 4:57 AM, Ricardo Telichevesky wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a strange problem with extremely large procedures when generating
> 64-bit code
> I am using gcc 4.9.2 on RHEL6.3 on a 64-thread 4-socket Xeon E7 4820 with
> 256GB of memory. No avx extensions, using sse option whe
Hi,
I have a strange problem with extremely large procedures when generating
64-bit code
I am using gcc 4.9.2 on RHEL6.3 on a 64-thread 4-socket Xeon E7 4820 with 256GB of memory. No avx extensions, using sse option when building the compiler. This particular code is serial. I made measure
