From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29690 invoked by alias); 23 May 2003 22:29:40 -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 29620 invoked by alias); 23 May 2003 22:29:40 -0000 Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 22:54:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030523222940.29619.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "pinskia@physics.uc.edu" 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/msg02357.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 ------- Additional Comments From pinskia@physics.uc.edu 2003-05-23 22:29 ------- Subject: Re: [Bug other/10944] alloc_page in ggc-page.c is slow Yes it is spending 90% of the time in alloc_page in that list traversal. I used Shikari (part of the CHUD tools) on Mac OS X for profiling the complier 10000 samples ever 1ms (10s in total). I can find out the backtrace if you want it. Thanks, Andrew Pinski On Friday, May 23, 2003, at 17:52 US/Eastern, zack@gcc.gnu.org wrote: > > 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.