I had a play with the vecotiser to see how peeling, unrolling, and
alignment affected the performance of simple memory bound loops.
The short story is:
* For fixed length loops, don't peel
* Performance is the same for 8 byte aligned arrays and up
* Performance is very similar for unaliged arra
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 24 November 2011 23:06, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 24 November 2011 22:02, Christoffer Dall wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Peter Maydell
>>> wrote:
Pretty high up my todo list was rebasing your kvm patch on to
ma
On 24 November 2011 23:06, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 24 November 2011 22:02, Christoffer Dall wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Peter Maydell
>> wrote:
>>> Pretty high up my todo list was rebasing your kvm patch on to
>>> master / qemu-linaro (the two are more or less the same for this
This issue happend,when I was compiling ARM kernel.
I could not get it where -Werror gets overriden in tools/perf.
Could you tell me where is it ?
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 01:53:40PM +, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 02:09:29AM +0700, tknv wrote:
> > Sorry for lacking information.
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 02:09:29AM +0700, tknv wrote:
> Sorry for lacking information.
> I would like to explain again.
> When I compile kernel with gcc-4.4.3 and remove Werror from Makefile of
> top of kernel tree, then no warnings to error.
> When using gcc version 4.6.1 (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.6.1-9ubu
Ramana Radhakrishnan writes:
> On 29 November 2011 12:04, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>> Ramana Radhakrishnan writes:
>>> Now that upstream trunk is in stage3 and we have a few patches that
>>> won't really make it upstream until stage1 is reopened is it
>>> worthwhile having a new status in the
On 29 November 2011 12:04, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Ramana Radhakrishnan writes:
>> Now that upstream trunk is in stage3 and we have a few patches that
>> won't really make it upstream until stage1 is reopened is it
>> worthwhile having a new status in the merge requests that moves it
>> into a
Ramana Radhakrishnan writes:
> Now that upstream trunk is in stage3 and we have a few patches that
> won't really make it upstream until stage1 is reopened is it
> worthwhile having a new status in the merge requests that moves it
> into a to_upstream status . The other option is to have a common
Hi,
Now that upstream trunk is in stage3 and we have a few patches that
won't really make it upstream until stage1 is reopened is it
worthwhile having a new status in the merge requests that moves it
into a to_upstream status . The other option is to have a common
spreadsheet that we keep updatin
