Experimenting with tree inliner parameter settings

[Steven Bosscher]

Op ma 05-05-2003, om 14:32 schreef Gerald Pfeifer:
> Build time of the whole package improves from 3:37 to 3:00, but bench-
> marks, which exercise different parts (and code bases) of the system
> decrease.

Thanks for looking at this.

> Times in [s], average over three runs, std.dev. in parentheses.
> 
>                      |   original    |   --params    |
> ---------------------+---------------+---------------+
>       STRATCOMP1-ALL |  20.07 (0.04) |  18.62 (0.04) |
>    STRATCOMP-770.2-Q |   0.87 (0.00) |   0.90 (0.00) |
>                2QBF1 |  21.49 (0.05) |  22.30 (0.03) |
>           PRIMEIMPL2 |  10.45 (0.01) |  10.74 (0.03) |
>             ANCESTOR |  10.56 (0.05) |  10.82 (0.02) |
>        3COL-SIMPLEX1 |   7.74 (0.02) |   8.00 (0.03) |
>         3COL-LADDER1 |  49.72 (0.10) |  52.39 (0.36) |
>       3COL-N-LADDER1 |  25.84 (0.11) |  26.12 (0.04) |
>         3COL-RANDOM1 |  13.70 (0.03) |  13.94 (0.04) |
>           HP-RANDOM1 |  17.99 (0.07) |  18.40 (0.06) |
>        HAMCYCLE-FREE |   1.80 (0.00) |   1.88 (0.00) |
>              DECOMP2 |  21.02 (0.06) |  22.49 (0.09) |
>         BW-P4-Esra-a |  77.36 (0.09) |  78.56 (0.20) |
>         BW-P5-nopush |   6.55 (0.02) |   6.64 (0.03) |
>        BW-P5-pushbin |   6.24 (0.04) |   6.31 (0.01) |
>      BW-P5-nopushbin |   2.03 (0.00) |   2.10 (0.02) |
>               3SAT-1 |  33.38 (0.21) |  34.25 (0.06) |
>    3SAT-1-CONSTRAINT |  19.94 (0.09) |  20.50 (0.05) |
>         HANOI-Towers |   4.61 (0.02) |   5.03 (0.02) |
>               RAMSEY |   9.28 (0.00) |   9.78 (0.03) |
>              CRISTAL |  13.34 (0.03) |  13.70 (0.08) |
>              HANOI-K |  40.25 (0.21) |  41.83 (0.11) |
>            21-QUEENS |   9.34 (0.06) |   9.44 (0.03) |
>    MSTDir[V=13,A=40] |  19.74 (0.00) |  20.22 (0.01) |
>    MSTDir[V=15,A=40] |  19.97 (0.05) |  20.49 (0.04) |
>  MSTUndir[V=13,A=40] |  10.81 (0.01) |  11.11 (0.01) |
>          TIMETABLING |  11.12 (0.05) |  12.00 (0.02) |
> ---------------------+---------------+---------------+

That does not look good, all but one are much slower :-(

Would you know what the numbers look like with 3.2.3?

> The descrease is not drastic, but in fact GCC already is not too good
> on that code base, and by reducing these parameters I feel we're mostly
> papering over problem elsewhere (and should do that as a measure of last
> resort only).

We're papering over troublesome algorithms in the back end, obviously
the correct fix would be to get rid of those, but who's working on
that??

Greetz
Steven