Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751220AbXAFIZO (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Jan 2007 03:25:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751218AbXAFIZO (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Jan 2007 03:25:14 -0500 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:35143 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751220AbXAFIZM (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Jan 2007 03:25:12 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20070105171735.GA4745@ucw.cz> References: <787b0d920701032311l2c37c248s3a97daf111fe88f3@mail.gmail.com> <27e6f108b713bb175dd2e77156ef61d0@kernel.crashing.org> <787b0d920701040904i553e521fsb290acf5059f0b62@mail.gmail.com> <8069085182dff3b0e63a661d81804dbb@kernel.crashing.org> <20070105171735.GA4745@ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: akpm@osdl.org, Albert Cahalan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, s0348365@sms.ed.ac.uk, bunk@stusta.de, mikpe@it.uu.se, torvalds@osdl.org From: Segher Boessenkool Subject: Re: kernel + gcc 4.1 = several problems Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 09:23:01 +0100 To: Pavel Machek X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.623) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1328 Lines: 40 >> For a different mailing list indeed; let me just point >> out >> that for certain important quite common cases it's an >> ~50% >> overall speedup. > > Hmm, what code was that? 'signed int does not wrap around' does not > seem to provide _that_ much info... One of the recent huge threads on the GCC dev list has a post that says *some other* compiler gets a result like this from this optimisation (I don't have a link to the exact post and I don't remember the details; perhaps it was XLC?) Sorry if I wasn't clear enough and you understood I meant that GCC exploits this optimisation opportunity well enough for such nice results already. - - - So I searched for it anyway: It looks like the result for *integer* code wasn't *all* that dramatic a difference. Anyway, it's obvious that the optimisation can certainly give nice results and it wouldn't be a good idea for the Linux kernel to dismiss it without really evaluating the impact first; and anyway, this is for some future date, GCC-4.2 isn't here yet. Segher - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/