This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc and compiling speed
- From: Theo de Raadt <deraadt at cvs dot openbsd dot org>
- To: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>, Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>, tech at openbsd dot org, Marc Espie <espie at quatramaran dot ens dot fr>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org List" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 20:59:38 -0700
- Subject: Re: gcc and compiling speed
> (I assumed you're not suggesting they download the entire BSD
> kernel)
We don't believe it is restricted to just our kernel. And we've never
really talked about kernel compile speed, instead we measure "make
build" time, that meaning the compilation of the full system --
kernel, bootblocks, all the libraries, everything. It is a giant
source tree.
A 40% slowdown from just changing compilers ... how do you explain
that? I explain it by saying the compiler builds the entire system
40% slower.
More than that, we think everything compiles slower, on all
architectures. There is some variance; some systems slow down more
than others.
And thus far, there's been no real evidence contrary.
Perhaps the gcc people are sticking to microbenchmarks?
We don't know. But they keep asking for micro-test reports... Why
don't they compare themselves to see how much slower it is. For
the best impact, I recommend using a sparc64. But an i386 or powerpc
will show it too.