From: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@stud.uni-dortmund.de>
To: "Alexander V. Bilichenko" <dmor@7ka.mipt.ru>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: GCC3.0 Produce REALLY slower code!
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 11:16:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010625111657.C13348@emma1.emma.line.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <001301c0fcff$47c05160$d55355c2@microsoft>
In-Reply-To: <001301c0fcff$47c05160$d55355c2@microsoft>
On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Alexander V. Bilichenko wrote:
> Hello All!
> Some tests that I have recently check out.
> kernel compiled with 3.0 (2.4.5) function call: 1000000 iteration. 3% slower
> than 2.95.
> test example - hash table add/remove - 4% slower (compiled both
> with -O2 -march=i686).
> Why have this version been released?
Because it comes with various other improvements, among them better
error detection, better C++ support, integrated GCJ (but regretfully
still without Ada 95), to name a few reasons.
3% to 4% loss in a first release of a new major release is not a big
deal, although I found similar results on leafnode's texpire.
However, 3% do not warrant me spending my time complaining. Maybe some
optimization is missing, maybe other operations than the ones you
checked are faster. So there.
You might run an entire benchmark suite and report back, tough. :-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-06-25 9:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-06-24 22:44 Alexander V. Bilichenko
2001-06-24 22:48 ` Rik van Riel
2001-06-24 23:46 ` Luigi Genoni
2001-06-25 9:33 ` Thomas Pornin
2001-06-24 23:19 ` Daniel Phillips
2001-06-25 9:16 ` Matthias Andree [this message]
2001-06-25 11:31 ` Alexander V. Bilichenko
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.21.0106251339370.13095-100000@rudy.mif.pg.gda.pl>
2001-06-25 11:53 ` Alexander V. Bilichenko
2001-06-25 23:30 ` Hacksaw
2001-06-26 0:29 ` Alexander V. Bilichenko
2001-06-26 1:21 ` Hacksaw
2001-06-26 7:40 ` Thomas Pornin
2001-06-26 8:18 ` Hacksaw
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20010625111657.C13348@emma1.emma.line.org \
--to=matthias.andree@stud.uni-dortmund.de \
--cc=dmor@7ka.mipt.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®