This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Huge compile time & run time performance regression 3.3 -> HEAD
- From: Richard Guenther <rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 21:33:55 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: Huge compile time & run time performance regression 3.3 -> HEAD
On Sun, 18 May 2003, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Sun, 18 May 2003, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> > Top of a profile of gcc3.4 is
> >
> > Flat profile:
> >
> > Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds.
> > % cumulative self self total
> > time seconds seconds calls s/call s/call name
> > 7.47 79.18 79.18 906 0.09 0.09 compute_store_table
> > 6.92 152.54 73.36 262785751 0.00 0.00 expr_equiv_p
> > 6.76 224.21 71.67 170098 0.00 0.00 fixup_var_refs_insns
> > 5.58 283.38 59.17 12865 0.00 0.00 loop_regs_scan
> > 4.39 329.97 46.59 364279 0.00 0.00 compute_transp
>
> Compared to a 3.3 profile:
>
> Flat profile:
>
> Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds.
> % cumulative self self total
> time seconds seconds calls ms/call ms/call name
> 8.08 45.30 45.30 272942 0.17 0.17 compute_transp
> 7.15 85.38 40.08 263012170 0.00 0.00
> splay_tree_splay_helper
> 5.62 116.92 31.54 165540544 0.00 0.00 true_dependence
> 4.72 143.36 26.44 203228718 0.00 0.00
> mems_in_disjoint_alias_sets_p
> 3.80 164.68 21.32 171556 0.12 0.12 clear_table
> 3.61 184.92 20.24 9131 2.22 2.69 loop_regs_update
Sorry for always talking with myself in the public, but doesnt this look
like store-motion being the culprit? Wasnt that re-enabled in 3.4 only
(despite -fverbose-asm listing -fgcse-sm for both 3.3 and 3.4)?
Richard.