public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "kcc at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug sanitizer/55309] gcc's address-sanitizer 66% slower than clang's
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 09:22:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-55309-4-Y6yEIYdT2v@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-55309-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55309
--- Comment #6 from Kostya Serebryany <kcc at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-02-05 09:21:59 UTC ---
I am slightly confused. Are we discussing compile time or test-run-time?
I've just built SPEC 2006 with -fsanitize=address -O2
gcc: r195706
clang: r174324
Measured on Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU W3690 @ 3.47GHz
clang gcc
400.perlbench, 1209.00, -1.00, -0.00
401.bzip2, 885.00, 1187.00, 1.34
403.gcc, 739.00, 756.00, 1.02
429.mcf, 602.00, 612.00, 1.02
445.gobmk, 840.00, 1191.00, 1.42
456.hmmer, 1304.00, 1838.00, 1.41
458.sjeng, 923.00, 1326.00, 1.44
462.libquantum, 543.00, 481.00, 0.89
464.h264ref, 1271.00, -1.00, -0.00
471.omnetpp, 631.00, 624.00, 0.99
473.astar, 672.00, 765.00, 1.14
483.xalancbmk, 500.00, 521.00, 1.04
433.milc, 710.00, 629.00, 0.89
444.namd, 637.00, 539.00, 0.85
447.dealII, 650.00, 714.00, 1.10
450.soplex, 389.00, 419.00, 1.08
453.povray, 459.00, 432.00, 0.94
470.lbm, 388.00, 409.00, 1.05
482.sphinx3, 998.00, 1335.00, 1.34
400.perlbench fails with a real asan-ish warning
(clang can use a blacklist file and disables instrumentation for the buggy
function.
See https://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/wiki/FoundBugs#Spec_CPU_2006
and
https://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/wiki/AddressSanitizer#Turning_off_instrumentation)
464.h264ref with gcc loops forever, I did not investigate why.
So, on average clang+asan is faster than gcc-asan (up to 40%!),
but in some cases (mostly, FP code) gcc is faster (up to 15%)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-05 9:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-11-13 10:01 [Bug other/55309] New: " markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2012-11-13 21:10 ` [Bug other/55309] " konstantin.s.serebryany at gmail dot com
2012-11-13 21:31 ` markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2012-11-14 7:52 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-11-14 16:38 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-11-14 17:03 ` markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2013-02-05 9:22 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2013-02-05 9:43 ` [Bug sanitizer/55309] " kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-05 9:56 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-05 10:31 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-05 10:42 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-05 10:55 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-05 11:18 ` markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2013-02-05 11:24 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-05 11:26 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-05 12:23 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-06 10:56 ` dodji at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-06 11:19 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-06 12:25 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-06 12:39 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-06 12:43 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-06 12:49 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-06 15:03 ` dodji at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-07 5:02 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-07 17:01 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-07 17:18 ` dvyukov at google dot com
2013-02-08 6:31 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-08 9:02 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-08 9:13 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-08 9:25 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-11 14:43 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-11 15:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-12 6:48 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-12 7:03 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-12 8:40 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-12 8:47 ` dvyukov at google dot com
2013-02-12 8:59 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-12 11:18 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-12 11:31 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-12 11:42 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-12 14:00 ` howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu
2013-02-12 14:12 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-12 14:42 ` howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu
2013-02-22 7:11 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-22 8:31 ` Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2013-02-22 8:36 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-22 13:09 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-22 13:52 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-22 13:55 ` Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2013-02-22 14:30 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-22 14:54 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-22 15:01 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-22 15:04 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-22 15:06 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-22 15:14 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-22 16:11 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2013-02-26 7:43 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-28 11:32 ` kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-01-27 8:22 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.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=bug-55309-4-Y6yEIYdT2v@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
--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).