dons at galois.com
Sat Feb 20 20:57:01 EST 2010
> I've been looking at some of these cases and seeing how the LLVM
> back-end performs. My general impression from benchmarking the LLVM
> back-end in the past has been that it generally performs with similar
> characteristics as the C code generator (that is, where the C code
> generator stood out compared to the NCG, so did LLVM).
> (On x86-32/Mac OS X 10.5, had some issues getting x64 working at moment):
> ./zipWith3_viac 0.72s
> ./zipWith3_fasm 0.65s
> ./zipWith3_llvm 0.38s
Those are great numbers!
I've added llvm support to ghc-core (if you compile with -fllvm,
ghc-core will display the core and assembly in the pager, syntax
Unfortunately, llvm.org is down, so I can't apply patches to my llvm
install at the moment, but I have managed to compile a fair few things
on x86_64 -- they don't run though :-)
What's the status of the x86_64 llvm backend, do you know, and are there
ways to tune the optimizations that llvm applies?
Should we just be using the llvm binding package on Hackage?
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users