From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9638 invoked by alias); 21 Dec 2002 18:52:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 9619 invoked by uid 61); 21 Dec 2002 18:52:46 -0000 Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 10:52:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20021221185246.9618.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, pfr+gcc@cs.cmu.edu From: bangerth@dealii.org Reply-To: bangerth@dealii.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, pfr+gcc@cs.cmu.edu, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c++/8675: 30% slower code using gcc3.2 vs. gcc3.0.1 X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg01201.txt.bz2 List-Id: Synopsis: 30% slower code using gcc3.2 vs. gcc3.0.1 State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback State-Changed-By: bangerth State-Changed-When: Sat Dec 21 10:52:45 2002 State-Changed-Why: It is very hard to track down where within 20,000 lines of code something becomes slower if you are not familiar with what the code does, where call-paths are, etc. I think you need to provide us with more information about what goes wrong, i.e. try to identify functions that become significantly slower and possibly show us the differences in the generated assembler code. Sorry for not being of more help -- I guess for performance regressions we really need cooperation from the people who file the reports... Thanks Wolfgang http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=8675