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: LMbench as gcc performance regression test?

From: Larry McVoy <lm at bitmover dot com>
To: Dan Kegel <dank at kegel dot com>
Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz <dan at debian dot org>, GCC Mailing List <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 09:18:18 -0700
Subject: Re: LMbench as gcc performance regression test?
References: <3F51A201.8090108@kegel.com> <20030831152449.GA6893@nevyn.them.org> <3F521B4E.10909@kegel.com>

On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 08:59:10AM -0700, Dan Kegel wrote:
> I need to make sure that moving to a newer compiler for our kernel
> will cause no performance regressions.  

Perhaps people think that you mean to compile LMbench w/ different GCC's and
maybe what you really mean is compile the same kernel with different GCC's
and measure that.
-- 
---
Larry McVoy              lm at bitmover.com          http://www.bitmover.com/lm

References:
- LMbench as gcc performance regression test?
  - From: Dan Kegel
- Re: LMbench as gcc performance regression test?
  - From: Daniel Jacobowitz
- Re: LMbench as gcc performance regression test?
  - From: Dan Kegel

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