This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ 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] |
this looks a bit strange to me since it doesn't match my testresults (outside of the libstdc++ testsuite). I know, I should find the answer to this myself but I have not access to the machine where I have the required tools (tcl etc) right now...
Guys, I took a look at Benjamin's numbers. It looks like some of the tests are swapping (is that possible, Benjamin?): 'r' time way higher than 'u'+'s'. For this reason, I personally think that 'r' time is useless other than as an indirect measure that (e.g. in this case) __mt_alloc may be taking more memory to run the same work-load.
Honestly, I didn't really follow the technical details of your changes to the testsuite, but I can say for sure that whereas on mainline my 512 M machine runs the allocator tests quite smoothly, on the 3_4 branch it becomes almost unusable...
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |