On Saturday 24 February 2007 14:27:36 Richard Kenner wrote:
> > Sure - I wonder if there is a reliable way of testing whether we face
> > a non-base type in the middle-end. I suppose TREE_TYPE (type) != NULL
> > won't work in all cases... (?)
>
> That's the right way as far as I know.
Note that
> Note that having TREE_TYPE(type)!=NULL does not imply that the type and the
> base type are inequivalent. For example, if you declare a type Int as
> follows:
> subtype Int is Integer;
> then TREE_TYPE(type_for_Int)=type_for_Integer, but the types are equivalent,
> in particular they have
On 2/24/07, Serge Belyshev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have compared 4.1.2 release (r121943) with three revisions of 4.2 on spec2k
on an 2GHz AMD Athlon64 box (in 64bit mode), detailed results are below.
In short, current 4.2 performs just as good as 4.1 on this target
with the exception of hug
On 2/25/07, Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2/24/07, Serge Belyshev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have compared 4.1.2 release (r121943) with three revisions of 4.2 on spec2k
> on an 2GHz AMD Athlon64 box (in 64bit mode), detailed results are below.
>
> In short, current 4.2 performs
$ config.guess
i686-pc-mingw32
> gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-mingw32
Configured with: ../gcc-4.1.2/configure --prefix=/mingw --enable-threads
--disab
le-nls --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-win32-registry
Thread model: win32
gcc version 4.1.2
$ uname -a
MINGW32_NT-5.1 1.0.1
Serge Belyshev wrote:
I have compared 4.1.2 release (r121943) with three revisions of 4.2 on spec2k
on an 2GHz AMD Athlon64 box (in 64bit mode), detailed results are below.
In short, current 4.2 performs just as good as 4.1 on this target
with the exception of huge 80% win on 178.galgel. All ot
"Vladimir N. Makarov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I run SPEC2000 several times per week and always look at 3 runs (to be
> sure that is nothing wrong happened) but I never saw such big
> "confidence" intervals (as I understand that is difference between max
> and min of 3 runs divided by the sco
>
> I've been trying to keep the GCC_4.3_Release_Planning wiki page up to
> date, and I'd like to be sure I haven't missed anything going in. I've
> moved several projects to the Completed section, and if I've done
> anything in error there, please correct it.
>
> So here's a survey of what's left
> "Vladimir N. Makarov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I run SPEC2000 several times per week and always look at 3 runs (to be
> > sure that is nothing wrong happened) but I never saw such big
> > "confidence" intervals (as I understand that is difference between max
> > and min of 3 runs divide
Serge Belyshev wrote:
"Vladimir N. Makarov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I run SPEC2000 several times per week and always look at 3 runs (to be
sure that is nothing wrong happened) but I never saw such big
"confidence" intervals (as I understand that is difference between max
and min of 3 ru
Jan Hubicka wrote:
I am running SPEC on both AMD and Intel machines quite commonly and I
must say that there seems to be difference in between those two. For P4
and Core I get results within something like 1-2 SPEC point (0.1%) of overall
SPEC score, for Athlon I was never able to get so close,
Hi,
I'm Alex Tzannes and I am porting GCC 4.0.2 to a new experimental parallel
architecture. Here's one issue I don't know how to go about. The ISA of
our machine is based on MIPS (so I made a copy of the MIPS back end and
have been modifying that). One conceptual difference is that the machine
can
> Jan Hubicka wrote:
>
> >I am running SPEC on both AMD and Intel machines quite commonly and I
> >must say that there seems to be difference in between those two. For P4
> >and Core I get results within something like 1-2 SPEC point (0.1%) of
> >overall
> >SPEC score, for Athlon I was never abl
Richard,
While fixing ports in preparation for the new dataflow
infrastructure, we found a problem with the way that the rs6000 port
represents clobbers and uses of registers in call and sibcall patterns.
The patterns clobber and use the rs6000 link register as a match_scratch
with constra
Hello all,
I added few testcases to the existing testsuite in gcc 4.1.1 for a
private target.
After running the testsuite i found out that all my test cases with
scan-tree-dump testing failed for one particular situation.
The values are scanned from gimple tree dump and its fails for cases like
15 matches
Mail list logo
