This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: program executin times differ between gcc versions

Joel Dice wrote:
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Paul Moore wrote:

Dear List,


Using optimization flags is not possible due to the fact that large
parts of the application failed in -O test runs and would need to be
fixed/tested extensively first. Profiling with -pg/gprof has not been
produced usable results as shared libraries are not being tracked.

In my experience, OProfile ( is much better than gprof at revealing the hotspots in my programs, including time spent in shared libraries. I strongly recommend it.
When hotspots occur in libraries, gprof is satisfactory only with static linking. Library questions seem unlikely to be relevant in this thread.

OTOH, I would worry more about correctness than performance at this point if the code breaks with optimization turned on.

That's for sure. gcc is unlikely to break reliable code with optimization, unless -ffast-math is set.

---AV & Spam Filtering by M+Guardian - Risk Free Email (TM)---

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]