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: Compilation performance comparison of gcc3.4.1 and gcc3.5.0 2004-08-30 on MICO sources

From: Mike Stump <mrs at apple dot com>
To: Steven Bosscher <stevenb at suse dot de>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>, Karel Gardas <kgardas at objectsecurity dot com>, GCC Mailing List <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:18:13 -0700
Subject: Re: Compilation performance comparison of gcc3.4.1 and gcc3.5.0 2004-08-30 on MICO sources
References: <Pine.LNX.4.43.0408311227330.1006-100000@thinkpad.gardas.net> <200408311234.03764.stevenb@suse.de> <413457ED.4090206@gnu.org> <200408311249.32872.stevenb@suse.de>

On Aug 31, 2004, at 3:49 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:

This may also just be noise.  Some passes run so fast that the
time vars are not accurate enough to record it.

We at apple use ~10ns clocks to record times... works better... Only problem, getting user/sys time out of the kernel into user space, so that merely grabbing time isn't costly. :-( Not really a problem, as wall is the only thing you can trust, and what matters the most anyway.

References:
- Re: Compilation performance comparison of gcc3.4.1 and gcc3.5.02004-08-30 on MICO sources
  - From: Karel Gardas
- Re: Compilation performance comparison of gcc3.4.1 and gcc3.5.0 2004-08-30 on MICO sources
  - From: Steven Bosscher
- Re: Compilation performance comparison of gcc3.4.1 and gcc3.5.0 2004-08-30on MICO sources
  - From: Paolo Bonzini
- Re: Compilation performance comparison of gcc3.4.1 and gcc3.5.0 2004-08-30 on MICO sources
  - From: Steven Bosscher

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