This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC trunk SPEC2000 performance
- From: Geoff Keating <geoffk at geoffk dot org>
- To: dalej at apple dot com
- Cc: dje at watson dot ibm dot com, dalej at apple dot com, mark at codesourcery dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 22:07:18 -0700
- Subject: Re: GCC trunk SPEC2000 performance
- References: <2D6A2373-846E-11D6-B669-003065C86F94@apple.com>
- Reply-to: Geoff Keating <geoffk at redhat dot com>
> Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 09:52:59 -0700
> Cc: Dale Johannesen <dalej@apple.com>, Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>,
> gcc@gcc.gnu.org, Geoff Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org>
> From: Dale Johannesen <dalej@apple.com>
> On Wednesday, June 19, 2002, at 07:43 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
>
> > To avoid the argument that GCC 3.2 performance regressions were
> > reported too late in the release cycle, does anyone know why the graphs on
> > Andreas Jaeger's SPEC CPU2000 performance tracking page show:
>
> Could the regression tester run some performance tests? It would be
> nice to catch these things early.
It could. Would you like to suggest a patch (perhaps to
contrib/regression/btest-gcc.sh), or a test procedure? That would
help the discussion, I think.
One of the most important design questions that need answering
is "how much performance regression is too much?".
--
- Geoffrey Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org> <geoffk@redhat.com>