Hi Gerald, thanks for your testing! On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 09:18:24AM +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Kurt Garloff wrote: > > I was browsing the gcc ML archives (I'm not subscribed) and found > > that the inliner may still not be tuned optimally in gcc-3.1. > > [...] > > * I have adapted by inliner patch (v3) to 3.1 (CVS 2002-04-23) > > and it still works ... > Bad news: This patch increases compilation time (for DLV, the package > I've been using to test performance) quite a bit: > > 2.95.3 4:01 4430752 > 3.0 23:54 6295044 > 3.0.3 3:58 3948444 > 3.1-20020422 4:38 3996096 > 3.1-20020424+kurtpatch 5:35 4102432 > 3.1-20020422+limit=800 6:37 4177344 OK, so from compile time and binary size, kurtv3 is somewhere around finline-limit=700 ... [...] > And excellent news: This patch really improves the quality of the > generated code, and quite significantly so in several cases (much > more than those 3% you claimed)! Amazing. I just also compared to your -800 results and we still win significantly more than half of the benchmarks. [...] > This would be very nice to have in GCC 3.1, if it were not for the longer > compile time. One could try with -finline-limit-540 or so and see whether we can similar compilation times as 3.1 and still win benchmarks. If yes, it could be an option for 3.1 to incorporate the patch and lower the default inline-limit. Regards, -- Kurt Garloff Eindhoven, NL GPG key: See mail header, key servers Linux kernel development SuSE Linux AG, Nuernberg, DE SCSI, Security