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: Use Bohem's GC for compiler proper in 4.1?

From: Stefan Strasser <sstrasser at systemhaus-gruppe dot de>
To: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 01:12:39 +0200
Subject: Re: Use Bohem's GC for compiler proper in 4.1?
References: <8304E3EF-A2E6-11D9-9E65-003065BDF310@apple.com> <424DF523.5020204@systemhaus-gruppe.de> <200504020312.j323C569028234@caip.rutgers.edu> <424E5DA1.2000900@systemhaus-gruppe.de> <200504021422.j32EMdlV005540@caip.rutgers.edu>

Kaveh R. Ghazi schrieb:

I'm curious what the 3.3 numbers are,


3.3 => 4.0 is a small improvement cpu-wise(not mem-wise).
3.4 is much better than both:

gcc-Version 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-8)
mem     426 mb
user    2m10.870s
sys     0m2.250s


gcc-Version 3.4.4 20041218 (prerelease) (Debian 3.4.3-6)
mem     387 mb
user    1m4.920s
sys     0m1.210s


gcc-Version 4.0.0 20041218 (experimental)
mem     581 mb
user    2m0.800s
sys     0m2.720s

(it's another file than yesterday, because on this one 3.4 -> 4.0 is more extreme)

The regression in 4.0 is pretty bad, definitely file a PR.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20733


--
Stefan Strasser

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Use Bohem's GC for compiler proper in 4.1?
  - From: Andrew Pinski

References:
- Re: Use Bohem's GC for compiler proper in 4.1?
  - From: Mike Stump
- Re: Use Bohem's GC for compiler proper in 4.1?
  - From: Stefan Strasser
- Re: Use Bohem's GC for compiler proper in 4.1?
  - From: Kaveh R. Ghazi
- Re: Use Bohem's GC for compiler proper in 4.1?
  - From: Stefan Strasser
- Re: Use Bohem's GC for compiler proper in 4.1?
  - From: Kaveh R. Ghazi

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