This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Tracking down gcc-4.0 performance regressions
- From: Scott Robert Ladd <scott dot ladd at coyotegulch dot com>
- To: Daniel Kegel <dkegel at google dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 08:34:17 -0400
- Subject: Re: Tracking down gcc-4.0 performance regressions
- References: <42A3F4CF.8030209@google.com>
Daniel Kegel wrote:
> So, I'm looking around for other reports of performance
> regressions in gcc-4.0. So far, the only other ones I've
> heard of are those reported in http://www.coyotegulch.com/reviews/gcc4/
> I'm tempted to have a student try reproducing and boiling down the POV-Ray
> performance regession first. Has anyone else already done that?
> I'd hate to repeat work.
I've found a couple of other performance regressions on various
applications. Acovea is very good at narrowing the cause of regressions
to specific GCC options.
Should reports be made against 4.0, or against 4.1?
Also, I'm not certain how to classify "options that don't work as
expected" -- for example, -floop-optimize2, which is a pessimisim on
many tests with 4.0.0.
..Scott