[PATCH] Tweaks for constant-equality-comparisons in BPI

[Renato Golin]

On 28 October 2013 14:25, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:

>  - On the other hand, if there is any validity to it, we're currently
> doing exactly the opposite of what we should be doing. Maybe doing exactly
> the opposite is the wrong approach as well, because the overall bias is
> very weak, and the best thing to do is really to do nothing
>

I think that's a good question that needs answering.

But the fact that your test-suite results didn't show any radical change in
behaviour (not that it's good for it, but), I don't think that either
choice will make a massive change on user code. It might be great for
benchmark A or B, but in general, it'd get lost in noise. In a nutshell, to
change the behaviour, we need a good reason, either that the current is
broken, or that the new is better, but we don't know that yet.


If you could, I'd appreciate it. I'll also provide an update with the BG/Q
> timings.
>

I'll check the test-suite and others on my Chromebook and will get back to
you.

cheers,
--renato
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20131028/1e77e87c/attachment.html>