[Bug tree-optimization/22564] [4.1 Regression] Compilation time increased about 11%

[Bug tree-optimization/22564] [4.1 Regression] Compilation time increased about 11%

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-24 01:50 -------
Even though this is a regression, we still don't have a testcase after 3 months
so closing as invalid.


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|WAITING                     |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |INVALID


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22564

[Bug tree-optimization/22564] [4.1 Regression] Compilation time increased about 11%

[giovannibajo at libero dot it]

------- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it  2005-07-20 17:32 -------
OK thanks. But let me stress one point:

> IMHO the graphs suggest that the daily bugfixes increased the 
> compilation time day after day.

In those days, we added something like 20 new projects to GCC (new optimization 
passes, algorithms and features). So it is kind of normal that new passes slow 
down the compiler day after day. Nonetheless, if you find specific testcases, 
we can probably optimize compile time here and there to compensate the general 
intrinsic slowdown.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22564

[Bug tree-optimization/22564] [4.1 Regression] Compilation time increased about 11%

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-20 15:08 -------
Also is the -O3 from yesterday before tree-promote-statics was removed, if so that precentage is 
misleading.  Today's timing should come back down to around 10%.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22564

[Bug tree-optimization/22564] [4.1 Regression] Compilation time increased about 11%

[loki at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From loki at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-20 12:31 -------
(In reply to comment #1)
You are probably right, but it is hard to find such a test case,
because there is only one significant daily regression (I guess from merging),
but this one doesn't explain the overall change.

IMHO the graphs suggest that the daily bugfixes increased the compilation time
day after day. So, it's maybe difficult to clearly show which algorithms are
responsible for this regression.

Soever, I will search for some tests which will demonstarte this compile-time-hog.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22564

[Bug tree-optimization/22564] [4.1 Regression] Compilation time increased about 11%

[giovannibajo at libero dot it]

------- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it  2005-07-20 08:15 -------
Of course: March 1st is when GCC went back to Stage 1. There have been dozen 
and dozen of projects contributed for GCC 4.1, and probably some still require 
tuning.

The best way to attack this is to find and analyze *specific* regressions. 
Would you please submit a couple of preprocessed sources which clearly show a 
compile time increase?

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |WAITING


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22564