This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org 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: tree-ssa performance (was: treelang fix for rs6000 / treelangnot proper front end)


On Tue, 2003-06-10 at 11:39, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> [ gcc-patches -> gcc ]
> 
> On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> >> (See PR8361 for an example.)
> > That's not quite fair on tree-ssa.  It really isn't that slow AFAICT.
> 
> It _is_, at least right now.  About factor of two for -O2 and -O3.
> 
> My last tests were on Friday and I just redid them from scratch with
> current mainline and current tree-ssa:
> 

FWIW, The very limited amount of compile time experience Ive got (an
early cut at reducing compile time for out-of-SSA) indicated that
tree-ssa requires more memory. If you have a smaller memory machine, its
compile times shoot up quite a bit due to swapping. On machines where it
can compile without swapping, compiles times are not so bad.

I suspect thats why Diegos spec runs aren't too bad, its probably a big
machine :-)  I've had files on one machine at least double in compile
time, and the same file on a bigger machine is pretty close to the
original.

Andrew




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