This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug sanitizer/55309] gcc's address-sanitizer 66% slower than clang's
- From: "kcc at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 09:43:11 +0000
- Subject: [Bug sanitizer/55309] gcc's address-sanitizer 66% slower than clang's
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-55309-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55309
--- Comment #7 from Kostya Serebryany <kcc at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-02-05 09:43:11 UTC ---
If we are talking about compile time, I observe 2x difference in favor of
clang:
building 483.xalancbmk
gcc+asan+O2: 564 seconds
clang+asan+O2: 243 second
gcc is built with default options
clang is built with -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=ON