This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: performance regressions, profiling _of_ gcc
- From: Jan Van Dijk <janvandijkinjapan at yahoo dot co dot jp>
- To: Michael Matz <matz at suse dot de>
- Cc: <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 01:06:28 +0000
- Subject: Re: performance regressions, profiling _of_ gcc
- Organization: TU/Eindhoven
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0304091404050.3646-100000@wotan.suse.de>
- Reply-to: jan at etpmod dot phys dot tue dot nl
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 12:04, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 9 Apr 2003, Jan Van Dijk wrote:
> > I did some googling, but found no satisfactory links. For example, there
> > was no response to message
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/1999-11n/msg00333.html.
>
> Please see http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-02/msg02051.html
Thank you (and Steven) for your quick replies. That message contained the info
I needed, I am sorry I missed it in my search.
One question remains: I was a bit surprised that the desire to enable
profiling cannot be expressed via the configure command (--enable-profile,
say). Configure could pass the -pg flag to stage 2 and 3 when bootstrapping,
it seems. That would save the need for a `stage 4'. Is there any particular
reason for the absence of this feature? (I am a complete gcc-internals newby,
so forgive me my ignorance if this is a silly question.)
Thanks again,
Bye, Jan.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! BB is Broadband by Yahoo! http://bb.yahoo.co.jp/