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: Code size regressions, mainline+branch

From: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>
To: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
Cc: David Edelsohn <dje at watson dot ibm dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 06:49:24 +0100
Subject: Re: Code size regressions, mainline+branch
References: <20020324151541.GF26180@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz><200203242146.QAA06914@makai.watson.ibm.com><20020324215106.GD1727@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>

Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz> writes:

>> 	I assume that you are referring to x86 executable size.  Can you
>> narrow the size regression any further?  Was binutils updated?
>
> See the graphs. Almost all binaries of spec tests grown up. The page
> does not mention any configuration change, even when it sounds like
> best explanation. I will double check this.
> Perhaps someone updated the machine to new glibc, that can only explan
> such a growth to me...

No changes from my side at all at the machine.

Andreas
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger
  SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
   private aj@arthur.inka.de
    http://www.suse.de/~aj

References:
- Code size regressions, mainline+branch
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: Code size regressions, mainline+branch
  - From: David Edelsohn
- Re: Code size regressions, mainline+branch
  - From: Jan Hubicka

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