public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/14563] octave built under Cygwin very slow
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2004 18:24:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040403182427.9691.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040312233606.14563.paulthomas2@wanadoo.fr>
------- Additional Comments From paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr 2004-04-03 18:24 -------
Subject: Re: octave built under Cygwin very slow
Sorry, yes, you are right, I can test it but not to see it's effect on
that gruesome cyming special.
Paul
epanelelytha at kellertimo dot de wrote:
>------- Additional Comments From epanelelytha at kellertimo dot de 2004-04-03 18:00 -------
>(In reply to comment #28)
>
>
>>Subject: Re: octave built under Cygwin very slow
>>
>>Hi,
>>
>>It's good to know that you are enagaging with this one. I sent a
>>message this morning that some how got deleted in the process of being
>>sent; it's main content was not to forget that the most extreme
>>manifestation of the difference is with g++ 3.3.1 (cygming special) for
>>which
>>
>>new/delete takes 1900ns/loop
>>malloc/erase 400ns/loop
>>
>>This is how we detected this in the first place.
>>
>>For reference, on the same Athlon 1700, 3.2.2 20030222 (RH 3.2.2-5)
>>
>>Gives
>>
>>new/delete 140ns/loop
>>malloc/erase 100ns/loop
>>
>>Unfortunately, I just this morning deleted the g++ 3.3.1 and replaced it
>>with 3.2 (which does not show such aberrant behaviour, by the way) , so
>>I cannot test your patch!
>>
>>
>But you can still test it with 3.2 (I'm using 3.5-tree-ssa 20040403).
>
>
>
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14563
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-04-03 18:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-12 23:36 [Bug c++/14563] New: " paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-13 7:24 ` [Bug c++/14563] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-13 8:06 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-14 20:33 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-03-24 9:52 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-24 15:57 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-03-24 16:38 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-24 17:03 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-03-24 21:07 ` Ben dot Diedrich at noaa dot gov
2004-03-24 22:58 ` dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net
2004-03-25 6:40 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-25 13:43 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-03-25 14:16 ` Ben dot Diedrich at noaa dot gov
2004-03-25 14:17 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-25 14:26 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-25 14:37 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-03-25 15:37 ` Ben dot Diedrich at noaa dot gov
2004-03-25 16:41 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-28 21:19 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-28 22:28 ` pkienzle at users dot sf dot net
2004-03-31 0:21 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-04-02 17:43 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-04-02 19:55 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-04-02 20:35 ` dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net
2004-04-02 20:41 ` pcarlini at suse dot de
2004-04-02 20:44 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-04-03 9:10 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-04-03 17:19 ` epanelelytha at kellertimo dot de
2004-04-03 17:54 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-04-03 18:00 ` epanelelytha at kellertimo dot de
2004-04-03 18:24 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr [this message]
2004-07-12 14:50 ` [Bug libstdc++/14563] new/delete much slower than malloc/free pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-07-12 19:21 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-07-12 20:55 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-07-13 4:17 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-07-28 2:50 ` ron_hylton at hotmail dot com
2004-07-28 3:57 ` ron_hylton at hotmail dot com
2004-07-28 6:03 ` [Bug target/14563] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-07-29 4:23 ` ron_hylton at hotmail dot com
2004-08-08 9:24 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-11-10 8:21 ` [Bug target/14563] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] new/delete much slower than malloc/free because of sjlj exceptions giovannibajo at libero dot it
2004-11-10 8:21 ` giovannibajo at libero dot it
2004-11-10 9:10 ` dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net
2004-11-10 12:46 ` [Bug target/14563] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-11-10 16:20 ` ron_hylton at hotmail dot com
2004-11-10 17:05 ` kjd at duda dot org
2004-11-13 11:03 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-11-14 17:03 ` ken dot duda at gmail dot com
2004-11-14 18:04 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-11-14 22:40 ` ken dot duda at gmail dot com
2005-05-12 14:53 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-05-12 14:54 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
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=20040403182427.9691.qmail@sources.redhat.com \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).