From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32369 invoked by alias); 16 Mar 2003 10:06:01 -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 32338 invoked by uid 71); 16 Mar 2003 10:06:01 -0000 Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 10:06:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030316100601.32336.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Steven Bosscher Subject: Re: optimization/2001: [3.2/3.3 regression] Inordinately long compile times in reload CSE regs Reply-To: Steven Bosscher X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg01054.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR optimization/2001; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Steven Bosscher To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, lucier@math.purdue.edu, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, rth@redhat.com Cc: Subject: Re: optimization/2001: [3.2/3.3 regression] Inordinately long compile times in reload CSE regs Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 11:03:09 +0100 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=2001 Richard's patch really improves things a lot for me: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-03/msg01478.html If somebody tries this: The patch doesn't apply cleanly, the first hunk of bb-reorder.c needs to be applied manually. The numbers: GCC 3.3, March 12 sources: at -O0: TOTAL : 4.66 0.24 6.14 at -O2: TOTAL : 316.67 1.71 329.12 GCC 3.3, March 16 sources + Richard's patch: at -O0: TOTAL : 3.17 0.15 3.50 at -O2: TOTAL : 5.60 0.17 5.91 The latter is the avarage of three runs because I could hardly believe these numbers. Brad, this is worth a try, don't you think? :-) Greetz Steven