[LLVMdev] [llvm-testresults] cfarm-x86-64 x86_64 nightly tester results

[Chris Lattner]

On Mar 9, 2009, at 8:53 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:

> This nightly tester is now using an llvm-g++ that produces the new  
> ODR linkage
> types.  This means that many more functions are being considered by  
> the
> inter-procedural optimization passes (for example, "linkonce"  
> functions defined
> in a header).  The result seems to be pretty huge swings (both good  
> and bad) in
> the C++ tests in the testsuite, see below.  Note that this tester is  
> often under
> heavy load due to other users, so take timing results with a pinch  
> of salt (a
> pinch is about +-10% in my experience with this tester).

Awesome Duncan, thank you for working on this!  From the LLC tests, I  
see:

> LLC:
> singlesource/Benchmarks/Adobe-C++/loop_unroll: 14.13% (3.75 => 3.22)
> singlesource/Benchmarks/Adobe-C++/simple_types_constant_folding:  
> 69.51% (6.92 => 2.11)
> singlesource/Benchmarks/CoyoteBench/fftbench: -563.16% (0.57 => 3.78)
> singlesource/Benchmarks/Misc-C++/ray: 6.45% (7.60 => 7.11)
> singlesource/Benchmarks/Misc-C++/sphereflake: 12.32% (6.09 => 5.34)
> singlesource/Benchmarks/Misc-C++/stepanov_container: -2438.89% (0.36  
> => 9.14)
> singlesource/Benchmarks/Misc/ffbench: -7.76% (3.61 => 3.89)
> multisource/Applications/lambda-0.1.3/lambda: 18.24% (9.76 => 7.98)

Can you check to see if the stepanov_container/fftbench regressions  
are real?  If so, it would be very interesting to know what is "going  
wrong" on them.

-Chris