From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15403 invoked by alias); 11 Mar 2003 02:36:01 -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 15388 invoked by uid 71); 11 Mar 2003 02:36:01 -0000 Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 02:36:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030311023601.15387.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Daniel Jacobowitz Subject: Re: c++/7086: [3.3/3.4 regression] compile time regression Reply-To: Daniel Jacobowitz X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00527.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR c++/7086; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, brd@paradise.net.nz Cc: Subject: Re: c++/7086: [3.3/3.4 regression] compile time regression Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 21:32:25 -0500 Just FYI, I tried this with -O2 on: g++ (GCC) 3.3 20030129 (prerelease) The -ftime-report output was: Execution times (seconds) garbage collection : 1.56 ( 2%) usr 0.03 ( 3%) sys 3.00 ( 3%) wall cfg construction : 0.33 ( 0%) usr 0.02 ( 2%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall cfg cleanup : 1.38 ( 1%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 1.00 ( 1%) wall trivially dead code : 0.30 ( 0%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 1.00 ( 1%) wall life analysis : 0.33 ( 0%) usr 0.05 ( 5%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall life info update : 0.13 ( 0%) usr 0.01 ( 1%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall preprocessing : 0.13 ( 0%) usr 0.01 ( 1%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall lexical analysis : 0.10 ( 0%) usr 0.05 ( 5%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall parser : 0.95 ( 1%) usr 0.07 ( 7%) sys 1.00 ( 1%) wall expand : 85.42 (88%) usr 0.24 (25%) sys 86.00 (88%) wall varconst : 0.02 ( 0%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall integration : 0.11 ( 0%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall jump : 0.92 ( 1%) usr 0.10 (10%) sys 1.00 ( 1%) wall CSE : 0.93 ( 1%) usr 0.01 ( 1%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall global CSE : 0.73 ( 1%) usr 0.05 ( 5%) sys 1.00 ( 1%) wall loop analysis : 0.86 ( 1%) usr 0.23 (24%) sys 2.00 ( 2%) wall CSE 2 : 0.33 ( 0%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall branch prediction : 0.19 ( 0%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall flow analysis : 0.06 ( 0%) usr 0.01 ( 1%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall combiner : 0.13 ( 0%) usr 0.01 ( 1%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall if-conversion : 0.03 ( 0%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall regmove : 0.11 ( 0%) usr 0.01 ( 1%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall mode switching : 0.04 ( 0%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall local alloc : 0.23 ( 0%) usr 0.03 ( 3%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall global alloc : 0.40 ( 0%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 1.00 ( 1%) wall reload CSE regs : 0.30 ( 0%) usr 0.01 ( 1%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall flow 2 : 0.07 ( 0%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall peephole 2 : 0.04 ( 0%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall rename registers : 0.10 ( 0%) usr 0.01 ( 1%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall scheduling 2 : 0.19 ( 0%) usr 0.01 ( 1%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall shorten branches : 0.05 ( 0%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall final : 0.06 ( 0%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 0.00 ( 0%) wall rest of compilation : 0.55 ( 1%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 1.00 ( 1%) wall TOTAL : 97.10 0.96 98.00 I couldn't try the testcase on HEAD because it includes preprocessed output from the STL; the new parser rejects lots of it, for already well-discussed reasons. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer