From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id p7OKew3P015583 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 22:40:58 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AkMBAENhVU7U4367kWdsb2JhbABCFoQ2ozQUAQEBAQkLCwcUAyKBQAEBAwEBI1YFCwsYAgImAgJXBhMJh2gCAqhDkWCBLIQNgRAEjAOMI4tw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,277,1312149600"; d="scan'208";a="117067097" Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.187]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 24 Aug 2011 22:40:53 +0200 Received: from office1.lan.sumadev.de (dslb-094-219-221-203.pools.arcor-ip.net [94.219.221.203]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mreu1) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MHci0-1QxRFY1wwW-003NHj; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 22:40:52 +0200 Received: from [192.168.1.111] (546BF154.cm-12-4d.dynamic.ziggo.nl [84.107.241.84]) by office1.lan.sumadev.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1E92BC00C7; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 22:40:52 +0200 (CEST) From: Gerd Stolpmann To: Benedikt Meurer Cc: caml-list@inria.fr In-Reply-To: <4EF51F29-D437-4F6F-9C91-DBEA3D4C3EB8@googlemail.com> References: <93199F3B-E9CF-4D93-9B2B-BAAB03F4FC08@googlemail.com> <4EF51F29-D437-4F6F-9C91-DBEA3D4C3EB8@googlemail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 22:40:51 +0200 Message-ID: <1314218451.3496.42.camel@thinkpad> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:kYVXGayZDmzMU0p2xNUjJuDtp1gYiQj8W7UhTXMHjZz 2rI3VmT6H5+dtVjmgwpDO4qR4z5UZz0VuUt9nwu3emADentNox XjyqmUFKzsHWOuzZ+AV4Jx/H6bepsfEit1ThqA6kOB7ie4iGov Qq8dQgxYx9J0sCyzsN4YZ8VArKTESp0CB6KI3uAFWUcZJLeLSF LWz0QkvFJWU834SpqzFWcQ61vaVIGJmq4NImjuoDWF4fgViyCE fMGrBp6DB98vJ1jVJRox/sylYcmXCqlhfR13FYJ6VFvlfljRdi 20dErb/JuKlQxxeaUezaiU1fJTjyPSFI1uDIATS+7SQf58gMnG LXkBWC01YBv99n8BvoHgiBzYh+4fJQsX8kGlSjai/ Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Linear Scan Register Allocator for ocamlopt/ocamlnat Am Mittwoch, den 24.08.2011, 21:35 +0200 schrieb Benedikt Meurer: > On Aug 1, 2011, at 17:04 , Gabriel Scherer wrote: > > > Do you have more precise measurements on > > Also posting Marcell's timing results here for reference (taken from bug 5324). > > > - the performance cost of this new allocator in the generated code? I > > suppose the results may vary between different architectures (eg. x86 > > is probably more sensitive to good allocation decisions than x86_64). > > - http://ps.informatik.uni-siegen.de/~meurer/tmp/compiletime_timings.pdf contains a comparison of the ocamlopt invocations. > - http://ps.informatik.uni-siegen.de/~meurer/tmp/runtime_timings.pdf contains comparison of the generated code. > > As can be seen from the results, amd64 is more sensitive to register allocator changes than i386. Well, this particular i386 CPU model is a strange guy - Northwoods have this extremely long pipeline, which is very sensitive to unforeseen jumps. It would be more interesting to see this test on a modern CPU in i386 mode. My guess is that it behaves then more like amd64. Gerd > Not really surprising to me. Would be interesting to see how this affects PPC/Sparc/Mips, but we don't have appropriate hardware available right now. Anyone with appropriate hardware and some spare time? :-) > > Benedikt > > -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Gerd Stolpmann, Darmstadt, Germany gerd@gerd-stolpmann.de Creator of GODI and camlcity.org. Contact details: http://www.camlcity.org/contact.html Company homepage: http://www.gerd-stolpmann.de *** Searching for new projects! Need consulting for system *** programming in Ocaml? Gerd Stolpmann can help you. ------------------------------------------------------------