This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa PATCH] Pick memory consumption low hanging fruit
- From: law at redhat dot com
- To: Dan Nicolaescu <dann at ics dot uci dot edu>
- Cc: Andrew MacLeod <amacleod at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 22:55:51 -0700
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa PATCH] Pick memory consumption low hanging fruit
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
In message <200311180336.hAI3aE9p025231@gremlin.ics.uci.edu>, Dan Nicolaescu wr
ites:
>Andrew MacLeod <amacleod@redhat.com> writes:
>
>[snip]
> > What does the memory footprint look like know when you compile with
> > -fdisable-ssa... If that doesnt make much difference, you can hack at
> > the SSA data structures all you want and it isnt going to affect memory
> > consumption in any measurable way. If there is a 40% increase then we
> > have something that needs to be fixed. I dont klnow if we've crept back
> > up or not since Ive been more focused on runtime for the last few weeks
> > since then.
>
>Here is side by side comparison of gc allocated memory for the
>testcase in PR8361 when using/not using the tree-ssa stuff.
Cool. Now for the fun part :-)
The bucket with the absolute greatest increase in allocations is the
size 32 bucket with an increase of nearly 120Megs. So the next trick
would be to determine where those allocations are coming from so we
analyze why we went so freaking crazy allocating memory for that
bucket.
jeff