Re: SPEC2000 comparison of LLVM-3.2 and coming GCC4.8 on x86/x86-64

2013-02-08 Thread Gabriel Paubert
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 11:46:04AM -0500, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > On 02/07/2013 11:09 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > >On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > >>I've add pages comparing LLVM-3.2 and coming GCC 4.8 on > >>http://vmakarov.fedorapeople.org/spec/. > >> > >>The pages ar

Re: SPEC2000 comparison of LLVM-3.2 and coming GCC4.8 on x86/x86-64

2013-02-07 Thread Vladimir Makarov
On 02/07/2013 01:51 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: Hi Vladimir, thanks for these numbers. ... Therefore I had to use *Dragonegg* (a GCC plugin which uses LLVM backend instead of GCC backend) for generation of Fortran benchmarks by LLVM. ... I believe such progress is achieved mostly beca

Re: SPEC2000 comparison of LLVM-3.2 and coming GCC4.8 on x86/x86-64

2013-02-07 Thread Jack Howarth
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 07:51:20PM +0100, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Vladimir, thanks for these numbers. > > ... >>Therefore I had to use *Dragonegg* (a GCC plugin which uses LLVM >>backend instead of GCC backend) for generation of Fortran benchmarks >>by LLVM. > ... >>I believe such

Re: SPEC2000 comparison of LLVM-3.2 and coming GCC4.8 on x86/x86-64

2013-02-07 Thread Richard Biener
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 7:16 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote: > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 9:28 AM, David Edelsohn wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Richard Biener >> wrote: >> >>> Also note that for SPEC -funroll-loops helps GCC (yes ... we don't >>> enable that by default at -O3, we probably s

Re: SPEC2000 comparison of LLVM-3.2 and coming GCC4.8 on x86/x86-64

2013-02-07 Thread Duncan Sands
Hi Vladimir, thanks for these numbers. ... Therefore I had to use *Dragonegg* (a GCC plugin which uses LLVM backend instead of GCC backend) for generation of Fortran benchmarks by LLVM. ... I believe such progress is achieved mostly because of a *new RA* introduced in LLVM 3.0 a

Re: SPEC2000 comparison of LLVM-3.2 and coming GCC4.8 on x86/x86-64

2013-02-07 Thread Xinliang David Li
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 9:28 AM, David Edelsohn wrote: > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Richard Biener > wrote: > >> Also note that for SPEC -funroll-loops helps GCC (yes ... we don't >> enable that by default at -O3, we probably should). > > Richi, > > Are you suggesting enabling -funroll-loops

Re: SPEC2000 comparison of LLVM-3.2 and coming GCC4.8 on x86/x86-64

2013-02-07 Thread David Edelsohn
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > Also note that for SPEC -funroll-loops helps GCC (yes ... we don't > enable that by default at -O3, we probably should). Richi, Are you suggesting enabling -funroll-loops by default at -O3? When I checked earlier this year, GCC was too a

Re: SPEC2000 comparison of LLVM-3.2 and coming GCC4.8 on x86/x86-64

2013-02-07 Thread Vladimir Makarov
On 02/07/2013 11:09 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote: I've add pages comparing LLVM-3.2 and coming GCC 4.8 on http://vmakarov.fedorapeople.org/spec/. The pages are accessible by links named GCC-LLVM comparison, 2013, x86 and x86-64 SPEC2000 under

Re: SPEC2000 comparison of LLVM-3.2 and coming GCC4.8 on x86/x86-64

2013-02-07 Thread Richard Biener
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > I've add pages comparing LLVM-3.2 and coming GCC 4.8 on > http://vmakarov.fedorapeople.org/spec/. > > The pages are accessible by links named GCC-LLVM comparison, 2013, x86 and > x86-64 SPEC2000 under link named 2013. You can find these lin

SPEC2000 comparison of LLVM-3.2 and coming GCC4.8 on x86/x86-64

2013-02-07 Thread Vladimir Makarov
I've add pages comparing LLVM-3.2 and coming GCC 4.8 on http://vmakarov.fedorapeople.org/spec/. The pages are accessible by links named GCC-LLVM comparison, 2013, x86 and x86-64 SPEC2000 under link named 2013. You can find these links at the bottom of the left frame. If you prefer email for