This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c/16834] New: huge compilation time increase from 3.2.3 to 3.3.2
- From: "jozef dot kruger at philips dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 30 Jul 2004 14:30:34 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c/16834] New: huge compilation time increase from 3.2.3 to 3.3.2
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
I noticed that moving from gcc 3.2.3 to gcc 3.3.2 made compilation time of files
with huge expressions increase by a lot.
What we compile here are simulators for our processors and those programs can
include huge expressions. Attached to this email you'll find a file that
contains a number of expressions of almost 80.000 characters. (it has been
preprocessed and can be easily compiled with: gcc -c -xc toplevel.s.i )
The problem is that with 3.2.3 compilation takes 32 seconds:
time gcc -c -xc toplevel.s.i
gcc -c -xc toplevel.s.i 31.17s user 0.66s system 99% cpu 32.001 total
With 3.3.2 it takes 38 minutes:
time ggcc -c -xc toplevel.s.i
gcc -c -xc toplevel.s.i 2269.29s user 4.87s system 99% cpu 38:04.19 total
The system was an Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.80GHz with 4gb memory...
I gzipped the file because the src was 4.7M, the gzipped one is only 112k :)
gcc -v:
Reading specs from /cadappl/gcc/3.3.2/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.3.2/specs
Configured with: /home/hooft/Level/Work/gcc/gcc-3.3.2/gcc-3.3.2/configure
--prefix=/cadappl/gcc/3.3.2 --enable-shared --enable-languages=c,c++,f77
--enable-__cxa_atexit --with-as=/cadappl/binutils/2.13.2/bin/as
--with-ld=/cadappl/binutils/2.13.2/bin/ld
--with-as=/cadappl/binutils/2.13.2/bin/as --with-ld=/cadappl/binutils/2.13.2/bin/ld
Thread model: posix
gcc version 3.3.2
--
Summary: huge compilation time increase from 3.2.3 to 3.3.2
Product: gcc
Version: 3.3.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jozef dot kruger at philips dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16834