| 1 |
On Fri, 22 May 2015 20:35:23 +0200 |
| 2 |
"Stefan G. Weichinger" <lists@×××××.at> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> isl is only pulled in by USE="graphite" for gcc ... |
| 6 |
> as I don't have that set I have gcc-5.1.0 compiled and working. |
| 7 |
> maybe remove that flag for now? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Yes, that is correct. Isl is needed only for the graphite loop |
| 11 |
optimization features of gcc. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
But then that leads to a new question: How important and/or useful |
| 14 |
is the gcc-graphite optimization? AFAIK it does improve performance |
| 15 |
in many cases. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Also, as opposed to link-time optimization (LTO), gcc-graphite is |
| 18 |
stable. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Since gcc-5.1.0 is not that urgent, I'll wait until the isl problem |
| 21 |
is sorted out. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Frank Peters |
Archives