search for: scopdetect130615

...ent results. As a result, we should not change the detection order. > >Sebastian had a patch for this. Does his patch improve the scop >detection time. LNT testing results for Sebastian's patch file can be seen on http://188.40.87.11:8000/db_default/v4/nts/recent_activity (Run Order: ScopDetect130615). You can compare ScopDetect130615 (Polly with Sebastian's patch) to pOpt130615 (Polly without Sebastian's patch). The result seems not show significant performance improvements with the bottom-up patch for LLVM test-suite benchmarks. You are right. I think I should better firstly focus on...

On 06/29/2013 05:04 PM, Star Tan wrote: > Hi all, > > > > I have investigated the compile-time overhead of "Polly Scop Detection" pass based on LNT testing results. > This mail is to share some results I have found. > > > (1) Analysis of "SCOP Detection Pass" for PolyBench (Attached file PolyBench_SCoPs.log) > Experimental results show that the

Hi all, I have investigated the compile-time overhead of "Polly Scop Detection" pass based on LNT testing results. This mail is to share some results I have found. (1) Analysis of "SCOP Detection Pass" for PolyBench (Attached file PolyBench_SCoPs.log) Experimental results show that the "SCOP Detection pass" does not lead to significant extra compile-time