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: Tree-ssa status with POOMA



Well - the number usually _is_ interesting for me, as if ggc can't help
and gcc goes into swap, I'm very unhappy ;) And for comparisons on the
same machine it is ok, too. But I never found -fmem-report useful, as
it doesn't tell me it needed 1.2Gigs of ram and gone into swap, but always
had numbers way lower. Like


Total 348M 214M 3409k

for a compilation requiring ~900MB of ram.

This is either due to memory fragmentation, or we've got some serious non-ggc'd leakage.
A copying collector would take care of it.
When I had implemented one, I saw significant reductions in used memory, but not ~300% (which is what would be necessary for these numbers above to add up).


For whatever that is worth.
--Dan


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