From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>
To: David Edelsohn <dje@watson.ibm.com>
Cc: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com
Subject: Re: Faster compilation speed 
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 04:15:00 -0000
Message-id: <200208201113.MAA14266@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com>
References: <200208141714.NAA31136@makai.watson.ibm.com>
X-SW-Source: 2002-08/msg01172.html

> >>>>> Richard Henderson writes:
> 
> Richard> The folks that are doing cache-miss studies and concluding anything
> Richard> should also go back and measure gcc 2.95, before we used GC at all.
> Richard> That's perhaps not ideal, since it's obstacks instead of reference
> Richard> counting, but it's not a worthless data point.
> 
> 	Thanks for the suggestion.  I think the results I got are pretty
> damning: 
> 
> gcc-2.95.3 20010315 (release)
> 
> Source		I/D$ miss -O2		I/D$ miss -O0
> ------		-------------		-------------
> reload.c		28			36
> insn-recog.c		48			36
> 
> 
> 	For comparison, GCC 3.3 has values in the low 20's, especially at
> no optimization.
> 
> David
> 

Do you have/can you get data for TLB misses?

R.