[LLVMdev] llvm LTO SPEC2000 results?

[Dale Johannesen]

I don't know of anyone focusing on better SPEC numbers, although those  
who have access run a subset primarily as a regression test.
On Darwin, llvm-gcc-4.2 -O4 will get interprocedural optimizations;  
this makes the compiler emit LLVM bitcode and the linker invoke the  
interprocedural optimizer.   You might need to have SnowLeopard.  The  
linker dependency means this is not very portable; there is something  
called the LLVM gold plugin that is aimed at doing the same thing on  
Linux, but I don't know how well it works.

On Oct 7, 2009, at 9:12 AMPDT, Jack Howarth wrote:

>   Are there any results for the SPEC2000 benchmarks
> using llvm with and without LTO? It would be interesting
> to know how the current LTO in llvm compares to the
> results being seen in current gcc trunk with their
> LTO...
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2009-10/msg00155.html
>
> It would appear that the gcc LTO implementation
> is finally showing results (although with a lot
> of wrong code results). I assume we really don't
> have a functional -fwhole-program in llvm-gcc-4.2
> but do we have one in clang?
>                 Jack
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev