From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4146 invoked by alias); 9 Jun 2010 10:50:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 4137 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Jun 2010 10:50:58 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FROM X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-wy0-f177.google.com (HELO mail-wy0-f177.google.com) (74.125.82.177) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 Jun 2010 10:50:48 +0000 Received: by wyb36 with SMTP id 36so680037wyb.22 for ; Wed, 09 Jun 2010 03:50:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.141.145 with SMTP id m17mr2517090wbu.51.1276080309958; Wed, 09 Jun 2010 03:45:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from yakj.usersys.redhat.com ([209.132.186.34]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y31sm16559882wby.22.2010.06.09.03.45.08 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 09 Jun 2010 03:45:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4C0F70B2.1030708@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 11:14:00 -0000 From: Paolo Bonzini User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100430 Fedora/3.0.4-3.fc13 Lightning/1.0b2pre Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Hubicka CC: Laurynas Biveinis , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, rguenther@suse.de Subject: Re: Make gimple.h checks conditional with ENABLE_GIMPLE_CHECKING References: <20100608225711.GA15770@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <4C0F63E6.4020709@gnu.org> <4C0F65FD.6070408@gnu.org> <20100609102252.GB16075@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> In-Reply-To: <20100609102252.GB16075@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-06/txt/msg00894.txt.bz2 On 06/09/2010 12:22 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > It is still possible that the change imporoved compilation time, just caused > slowdown due to different inlining decisions or so. Yeah, if the compiler has more work to do that would slow down the build. And it makes sense to have more inlining after your patch. > This seems to be supported by SPEC benchmarking > http://gcc.opensuse.org/SPEC/CINT/sb-barbella.suse.de-ai-64/times.html we > definitly have some improvements over in last few days on build times of pretty > much all benchmarks, still bootstrap is getting slower. Lets see how things > change with next run after the branch merge. Agreed. paolo