[Bug tree-optimization/26854] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Inordinate compile times on large routines

["lucier at math dot purdue dot edu" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

------- Comment #117 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu  2010-03-27 16:38 -------
Subject: Re:  [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Inordinate compile times on large
routines


On Mar 27, 2010, at 7:14 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:

> I wonder if the parsing numbers are accurate as the initial report has
> like 9s parsing while the current ones are >200s.  Can you explain  
> that
> difference?  (like, were you testing different source?)

Yes, different source (compiler.i instead of all.i), different  
(faster) machine.  Perhaps gathering the detailed memory stats affect  
the parser time.

Here are times for the original source file all.i using the same  
machine and compiler as in the immediately previous report for  
compiler.i:

  df live&initialized regs:  45.00 ( 8%) usr   0.00 ( 0%) sys  45.04  
( 8%) wall       0 kB ( 0%) ggc
  parser                :  19.60 ( 3%) usr   1.22 ( 7%) sys  21.25  
( 4%) wall   70217 kB ( 2%) ggc
  scheduling            : 301.86 (52%) usr   0.00 ( 0%) sys 301.87  
(51%) wall    8739 kB ( 0%) ggc
  TOTAL                 : 579.88            17.55            
597.65            3393985 kB

Glancing at top, the maximum reported memory usage was > 13GB.  I'll  
attach the detailed results for all.i next

> As is the testcase(s) are an interesting source of information -  
> maybe we
> should gather those up on a page in the wiki just in case we end up  
> closing
> this bug at some point (I suggest not to at the moment, the parsing  
> times
> look odd and >20GB memory use doesn't sound reasonable).  Did you ever
> test other compilers and see how they perform with respect to memory  
> usage
> and compile time?

No, none that were not a gcc derivative.

Brad


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26854