This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: compiling linux kernels with GCC 3.0
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Subject: Re: compiling linux kernels with GCC 3.0
- From: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at unitus dot it>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 23:53:48 +0200
- CC: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Organization: Universita' della Tuscia
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Reply-To: pcarlini at unitus dot it
Mark Mitchell wrote:
> > Is it true that there is no real evidence of performance improvements on
> > x86? If so, *why* in your (authoritative) opinion?
> I am not an expert on these issues. I am the Release Manager, not the
> all-knowing mastermind of GCC. :-)
> I have heard reports of improvements, I have heard reports of
> pessimizations. I do not have authoritative information one way or
> the other.
So, *who* has it?
The GCC project is proud of his regression testsuite. On the other hand I see
that there is an increasing attention to the reference benchmarks (e.g., Diego
Novillo and Andreas Jaeger running SPEC95 and SPEC2000).
Do you believe that a form of regression *performance* testing could be viable?
> We have to make tradeoffs between features and optimizations.
> GCC 3.0 was primarily a feature release; I hope that 3.1 will focus
> more on optimizations.
Of course. But perhaps that was not so clear reading the 3.0 highlights?
- Support for Java, including the GNU implementation of the Java
- A new x86 back-end, which generates faster code.
- A more efficient, more standards-compliant C++ compiler,
using an industry standard C++ ABI.
- A new, standards-conformant, implementation of the C++ standard
- Improved optimizations.
- Improved documentation.
Anyway, thanks for your attention and for your work, of course,