From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-prs-return-16613-listarch-gcc-prs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 30463 invoked by alias); 2 Apr 2002 09:56:03 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-prs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 30433 invoked by uid 71); 2 Apr 2002 09:56:02 -0000
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 01:56:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20020402095602.30432.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
To: rth@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
From: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: optimization/2692: excessive compile time with optimization
Reply-To: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00076.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-prs.sourceware.org>

The following reply was made to PR optimization/2692; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
To: Scott Snyder <snyder@fnal.gov>
Cc: rth@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
   nobody@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: optimization/2692: excessive compile time with optimization
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 01:49:27 -0800

 FWIW, 3.1 20020326 "only" took 12 minutes to compile this
 test case, and "only" used 45MB.  CPU users were
 
  expand                : 438.54 (63%) usr   0.11 ( 4%) sys 438.62 (62%) wall
  reload CSE regs       :  93.51 (14%) usr   0.01 ( 0%) sys  93.50 (13%) wall
  global alloc          :  77.31 (11%) usr   0.05 ( 2%) sys  77.38 (11%) wall
  regmove               :  46.59 ( 7%) usr   0.01 ( 0%) sys  46.56 ( 7%) wall
 
 
 r~