This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
RE: [PATCH][X86_64] Set bit_Fast_Unaligned_Load for Excavator family CPU's
- From: "Pawar, Amit" <Amit dot Pawar at amd dot com>
- To: Ondřej Bílka <neleai at seznam dot cz>
- Cc: "libc-alpha at sourceware dot org" <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 09:32:07 +0000
- Subject: RE: [PATCH][X86_64] Set bit_Fast_Unaligned_Load for Excavator family CPU's
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp dot mailfrom=Amit dot Pawar at amd dot com;
- References: <SN1PR12MB07330EBFA0ED52D659F4F46C97EF0 at SN1PR12MB0733 dot namprd12 dot prod dot outlook dot com> <20151216120810 dot GA21722 at domone>
- Spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
- Spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23
Ping!
-----Original Message-----
From: Pawar, Amit
Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2015 4:30 PM
To: 'Ondřej Bílka'
Cc: 'libc-alpha@sourceware.org'; 'H.J. Lu'
Subject: RE: [PATCH][X86_64] Set bit_Fast_Unaligned_Load for Excavator family CPU's
Ping!
-----Original Message-----
From: Pawar, Amit
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 3:10 PM
To: 'Ondřej Bílka'
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH][X86_64] Set bit_Fast_Unaligned_Load for Excavator family CPU's
>Should be ok, while benchtests are as bad as random noise for measuring performance I know that now amd processors are not optimized at all, I had some patches for to improve that situation that I could ping 11th time.
>
Thank you for reply. If it is OK can you or someone please upstream to the trunk?
>Particulary unaligned path is also better in bulldozer and these routines are good only for older cpus of phemonII era. I recalled there are some tweaks that I had for bulldozer but I don't remember these.
>
Our initial plan is to do for latest CPU's.
Thanks,
Amit Pawar