From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16921 invoked by alias); 13 Dec 2010 01:07:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 16911 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Dec 2010 01:07:49 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 01:07:46 +0000 From: "hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/44563] GCC uses a lot of RAM when compiling a large numbers of functions X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization X-Bugzilla-Keywords: compile-time-hog, memory-hog X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 01:07:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-12/txt/msg01347.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44563 --- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka 2010-12-13 01:07:33 UTC --- My profile was at -O2. Concerning Jakub's callgrind, the -O0 compilation finishes in about 44s for me. Profile is: 4349 3.8607 libc-2.11.1.so libc-2.11.1.so _int_malloc 3150 2.7963 cc1 cc1 record_reg_classes.constprop.9 2881 2.5575 cc1 cc1 htab_find_slot_with_hash 2104 1.8678 cc1 cc1 ggc_set_mark 2039 1.8101 libc-2.11.1.so libc-2.11.1.so msort_with_tmp 2005 1.7799 cc1 cc1 bitmap_set_bit 1836 1.6299 cc1 cc1 df_ref_create_structure 1775 1.5757 cc1 cc1 find_reloads 1738 1.5429 cc1 cc1 ggc_internal_alloc_stat 1538 1.3653 libc-2.11.1.so libc-2.11.1.so memset 1430 1.2694 cc1 cc1 eq_node 1375 1.2206 cc1 cc1 preprocess_constraints 1317 1.1691 libc-2.11.1.so libc-2.11.1.so _int_free 1309 1.1620 cc1 cc1 df_insn_refs_collect 1289 1.1443 cc1 cc1 ix86_function_arg_regno_p 1277 1.1336 cc1 cc1 df_ref_record 1249 1.1088 cc1 cc1 ix86_save_reg 1215 1.0786 cc1 cc1 ix86_compute_frame_layout 1171 1.0395 libc-2.11.1.so libc-2.11.1.so malloc_consolidate 1134 1.0067 cc1 cc1 extract_insn So I don't get that much of RA by itself. Tracking that malloc ineffeciency might be low hanging fruit.