From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261433AbUCJCIa (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Mar 2004 21:08:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261436AbUCJCI3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Mar 2004 21:08:29 -0500 Received: from fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.35]:54244 "EHLO fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261433AbUCJCI2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Mar 2004 21:08:28 -0500 Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 11:08:22 +0900 From: Norihiko Mukouyama Subject: RE: Kernel 2.6.3 patch for Intel Compiler 8.0 In-reply-to: <404E74EF.1010204@stesmi.com> To: Stefan Smietanowski , Norberto Bensa Cc: Ingo at Pyrillion , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi,Stefan!! >1/3 of the things are faster with icc. 2/3 of the things are faster >with gcc. Performance numbers not given. Thank you very much. I understood that meaning. By the way, I would like to learn the result of making his patch run on Itanium2. Because, the difference of the performance of the compiler being sure to influence most remarkably. Can anyone try? Thanks. Norihiko