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: We're out of tree codes; now what?


On 3/23/07, Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz@redhat.com> wrote:

> I don't have these around, and I mistakenly updated my tree, so the > numbers below are, unfortunately, incomparable to the numbers above. > The disturbing fact is that mainline seems to be significantly slower > now than it was in my previous tests (from just a few days ago), and > the slowdown (20%) is much greater than any of the slowdowns we've > been discussing in this thread. Has anyone else noticed this, or > perhaps it's something in my environment?

Yes. This first started oscillating about a week or so ago.

http://www.suse.de/~gcctest/c++bench/tramp3d/

Day-to-day resolution is hard to see on these graphs. And, what we
really need is version-to-version resolution anyway...

Note that this particular tester is also used to test effects of patches before they hit mainline. This one: http://www.suse.de/~gcctest/c++bench-haydn/tramp3d/ isn't.

Version-to-version resolution is really hard, but usually it's easy to
pinpoint an
offending patch.

And btw, I also prefer option (2), on 64bit hosts this will even have
zero memory
usage impact.

Richard.


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