Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "t2006".
Did you mean:
2006
2020 Aug 18
3
[RFC] Switching to MemorySSA-backed Dead Store Elimination (aka cross-bb DSE)
> On Aug 18, 2020, at 16:59, Michael Kruse <llvmdev at meinersbur.de> wrote:
>
> Thanks for all the work. The reductions in stores look promising. Do you also have performance numbers how much this improves the execution time? Did you observe any regressions where MSSA resulted in fewer removed stores?
I did not gather numbers for execution time yet, but I’ll try to share some
2020 Aug 18
7
[RFC] Switching to MemorySSA-backed Dead Store Elimination (aka cross-bb DSE)
...ores
Program legacy mssa. diff
test-suite...-typeset/consumer-typeset.test 186.00 1815.00 875.8%
test-suite...lications/sqlite3/sqlite3.test 29.00 167.00 475.9%
test-suite...T2006/445.gobmk/445.gobmk.test 19.00 88.00 363.2%
test-suite.../Applications/SPASS/SPASS.test 49.00 155.00 216.3%
test-suite...lications/ClamAV/clamscan.test 72.00 227.00 215.3%
test-suite.../Benchmarks/nbench/nbench.test 30.00 92....
2020 Aug 19
2
[RFC] Switching to MemorySSA-backed Dead Store Elimination (aka cross-bb DSE)
...n fewer removed
> stores?
> >
> > I did not gather numbers for execution time yet, but I’ll try to share
> some tomorrow.
>
>
> Here are some execution time results for ARM64 with -O3 -flto with the
> MemorySSA-DSE compared against the current DSE implementation for CINT2006
> (negative % means reduction in execution time with MemorySSA-DSE). This
> excludes small changes within the noise (<= 0.5%)
>
>
> Exec_time number of stores removed
> test-suite...T2006/456.hmmer/456.hmmer.test -1.6%. + 70.8%
> test-suite.../CINT2006/403.gcc/403.g...