Jim,
Thanks a lot for your clarification.
Best Regards
Ron
-Original Message-
From: Jim Wilson [mailto:jim.wil...@linaro.org]
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 10:45 AM
To: Xiaofeng Ren
Cc: Kugan ; Bernie Ogden
; linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org; Zhenhua Luo
Subject: Re: gcc
-Original Message-
From: Jim Wilson [mailto:jim.wil...@linaro.org]
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 7:49 AM
To: Xiaofeng Ren
Cc: Kugan ; Bernie Ogden
; linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org
Subject: Re: gcc-linaro-5.1 vs gcc-linaro-4.8
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 5:52 AM, Xiaofeng Ren wrote
t: Tuesday, January 05, 2016 6:51 PM
To: Xiaofeng Ren ; Bernie Ogden
Cc: linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org
Subject: Re: gcc-linaro-5.1 vs gcc-linaro-4.8
Hi Ron,
>
> Following part of assembly code for fcp function:
>
> Gcc-5.1:
> 40110c: 3dc00c6cldr
PM
To: Xiaofeng Ren
Cc: linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org
Subject: Re: gcc-linaro-5.1 vs gcc-linaro-4.8
Hello,
I'm not sure from the information below whether you have observed a performance
gap, or are expecting to observe one. Have you seen a performance gap?
Regards,
Bernie
On 5 Ja
Hello All,
I found one difference between gcc-linaro-5.1 vs gcc-linaro-4.8 while I'm doing
lmbench benchmark test for our LS1043 (cortex-A53).
While using gcc-linaro-4.8, gcc will generate advanced SIMD instructions (like
as ld1, etc), however, gcc-linaro-5.1 will not generate advance SIMD
instr
