Re: On K7, -march=k6 is good (Was Re: Why no -march=athlon?)

From: M. R. Brown (mrbrown@0xd6.org)
Date: Wed Dec 19 2001 - 12:56:16 EST

* Benoit Poulot-Cazajous <poulot@ifrance.com> on Wed, Dec 19, 2001:

>
> But gcc-2.95,x _supports_ "-march=k6", and we should use that instead of
> "-march-i686".
>

No, k6 != athlon. IIRC, the i686 optimization is closer to the Athlon than
the k6 opt.

>
> before the patch :
> 1017.92user 261.80system 24:39.89elapsed 86%CPU
> 706.33user 160.79system 16:23.61elapsed 88%CPU
> 1787.38user 418.76system 43:35.97elapsed 84%CPU
>
> after the patch :
> 1018.42user 253.85system 24:44.68elapsed 85%CPU
> 704.89user 151.76system 16:16.14elapsed 87%CPU
> 1786.96user 410.76system 43:05.32elapsed 85%CPU
>
> The improvement in system time is nice.
>

Er, there's not much difference...

Curious, what happens when you compile using gcc 3.0.1 against
-march=athlon?

M. R.


-
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/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 23 2001 - 21:00:19 EST