From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9281 invoked by alias); 23 May 2003 21:52:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 9268 invoked by uid 48); 23 May 2003 21:52:36 -0000 Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 22:08:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030523215236.9267.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "zack@gcc.gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug other/10944] alloc_page in ggc-page.c is slow X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg02347.txt.bz2 List-Id: PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10944 zack@gcc.gnu.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2003-05-23 20:19:39 |2003-05-23 21:52:36 date| | ------- Additional Comments From zack@gcc.gnu.org 2003-05-23 21:52 ------- The code in alloc_page is remarkably stupid, but the linked list traversal should only occur when trying to allocate an object larger than a single page, which is believed to happen almost never. Can you please find out whether it's really spending time in that list, or if some other area is the cause of the problem? I'll take responsibility for this bug; I've been meaning to get us per-order freelists for a long time. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.