On 06/09/10 07:16, Yao Qi wrote:
> I've put some ideas in this wiki page,
> https://wiki.linaro.org/Internal/People/YaoQi/Thumb2Optimize
We probably shouldn't post Internal links to this public list. Is there
any reason this can't be done in the open?
Now for the page content
I think you s
On Mon, 06 Sep 2010 14:16:25 +0800
Yao Qi wrote:
> Yao Qi wrote:
> > Hi,
> > We are looking for some possible improvements and optimizations on
> > thumb2 code size. Currently, I am running some benchmarks with
> > compilation flag "-Os -march=armv7-a -mthumb", and hope to find some
> > thing in
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010, Julian Brown wrote:
> Do
> you still have the code fragment handy (I don't remember exactly how
> it went)?
You can extract it from the wiki history with the "Info" action on the
page and then diffing rev
On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 12:55:59 +0200
Loïc Minier wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010, Julian Brown wrote:
> > Do
> > you still have the code fragment handy (I don't remember exactly how
> > it went)?
>
> You can extract it from the wi
Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> On 06/09/10 07:16, Yao Qi wrote:
>> I've put some ideas in this wiki page,
>> https://wiki.linaro.org/Internal/People/YaoQi/Thumb2Optimize
>
> We probably shouldn't post Internal links to this public list. Is there
> any reason this can't be done in the open?
I've moved thi
On 07/09/10 13:01, Yao Qi wrote:
>> * Investigate reduced alignment constraints?
>
> Any details on this?
No, I just know that some targets like to align functions to
cache-lines. This is a useful speed optimization, but does lead to lots
of "blank" gaps in the code. I have no real idea if ARM d
Julian Brown wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 12:55:59 +0200
> Loïc Minier wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010, Julian Brown wrote:
>>> Do
>>> you still have the code fragment handy (I don't remember exactly how
>>> it went)?
>> You c
Loïc Minier wrote:
> I see you moved the wiki page to the public space, thanks
>
> Couple of notes:
> * make sure you use the rename action on the page, I think this will
>preserver history (I didn't check whether you did or not, but I think
>not)
No, I didn't. I use copy and paste.
On Tue, 07 Sep 2010 21:06:10 +0800
Yao Qi wrote:
> Julian Brown wrote:
> > So yeah, I think there is indeed a possible improvement here (and we
> > don't even need to break the EABI, I don't think). Unless I've
> > overlooked something, anyway...
> Julian,
> I revert back the first example, and a
This reminds me of a PR that Bernd did:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40657
It is also support for adding the r0-r3 registers to the
epilogue/prologue push-pop for sake of reducing code size, though in a
sense even more aggressive; it tries to merge the local stack allocation
SP s
I've been checking over the benchmarks as a lead up to the 2010.09
release. We're in a good way compared to both 4.4.4 and 4.5.1 for
most non-trivial tests.
* pybench is 10.9 % faster than 4.4.4 and 7.7 % faster than 4.5.1.
* linpack is 46.4 % faster than 4.4.4 and the same as 4.5.1.
* ffmpeg h
Michael Hope wrote:
> I've been checking over the benchmarks as a lead up to the 2010.09
> release. We're in a good way compared to both 4.4.4 and 4.5.1 for
> most non-trivial tests.
> * pybench is 10.9 % faster than 4.4.4 and 7.7 % faster than 4.5.1.
> * linpack is 46.4 % faster than 4.4.4 and
12 matches
Mail list logo
