From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 94053 invoked by alias); 6 Mar 2018 15:13:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 94043 invoked by uid 89); 6 Mar 2018 15:13:22 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*f:sk:6f547f3, H*i:sk:6f547f3, HContent-Transfer-Encoding:8bit X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Mar 2018 15:13:21 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5BA667FDF6; Tue, 6 Mar 2018 15:13:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ovpn-117-5.phx2.redhat.com (ovpn-117-5.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.117.5]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B78E60BF3; Tue, 6 Mar 2018 15:13:17 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1520349196.2913.66.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: How big (and fast) is going to be GCC 8? From: David Malcolm To: Martin =?UTF-8?Q?Li=C5=A1ka?= , GCC Development Cc: Jan Hubicka , Richard Biener , Michael Matz , Martin Jambor Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 15:13:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <6f547f38-1751-c003-b5ae-52dae776d39a@suse.cz> References: <6f547f38-1751-c003-b5ae-52dae776d39a@suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-03/txt/msg00067.txt.bz2 On Tue, 2018-03-06 at 11:14 +0100, Martin Liška wrote: > Hello. > > Many significant changes has landed in mainline and will be released > as GCC 8.1. > I decided to use various GCC configs we have and test how there > configuration differ > in size and also binary size. > > This is first part where I measured binary size, speed comparison > will follow. > Configuration names should be self-explaining, the 'system-*' is > built done > without bootstrap with my system compiler (GCC 7.3.0). All builds are > done > on my Intel Haswell machine. > > Feel free to reply if you need any explanation. > Martin Some possibly silly questions: (a) was this done with: --enable-checking=release ? (b) is this measuring cc1 ? (c) are the units bytes? (so ~183MB for the unstripped system-O2- native cc1, ~25MB after stripping?) (d) do you have comparable data for gcc 7? Thanks Dave