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: We're out of tree codes; now what?

From: kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu (Richard Kenner)
To: doug dot gregor at gmail dot com
Cc: dje at watson dot ibm dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 11:11:30 EDT
Subject: Re: We're out of tree codes; now what?
References: <doug.gregor@gmail.com> <24b520d20703121113y61cd3911odd9c385ff775dfb9@mail.gmail.com> <200703121835.l2CIZb830240@makai.watson.ibm.com> <571f6b510703121230n73018556g470917c8d9fc6a2a@mail.gmail.com> <24b520d20703121301i6dc3a73fx765b859dabf7e595@mail.gmail.com> <10703122152.AA19282@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <24b520d20703190641j5cfdfcb0xeaa7a498b909b539@mail.gmail.com>

> So, about 16% slower with --enable-checking, 5% slower with
> --disable-checking.

That's about an order of magnitude more than I'd expect and is very strange.
To a very close approximation, the speed of integer code on modern machine
is affected only by the number of cache misses.  Why should this affect that>

References:
- We're out of tree codes; now what?
  - From: Doug Gregor
- Re: We're out of tree codes; now what?
  - From: David Edelsohn
- Re: We're out of tree codes; now what?
  - From: Steven Bosscher
- Re: We're out of tree codes; now what?
  - From: Doug Gregor
- Re: We're out of tree codes; now what?
  - From: Richard Kenner
- Re: We're out of tree codes; now what?
  - From: Doug Gregor

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