From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6358 invoked by alias); 30 Apr 2002 14:49:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 6329 invoked from network); 30 Apr 2002 14:48:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO www.dberlin.org) (151.203.24.120) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 30 Apr 2002 14:48:57 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www.dberlin.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C20C7189BB1D; Tue, 30 Apr 2002 10:48:56 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 07:59:00 -0000 From: Daniel Berlin To: Gerald Pfeifer Cc: Kurt Garloff , , Andreas Jaeger Subject: Re: inliner in gcc-3.1 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg01625.txt.bz2 > MSTDir[V=13,A=40]| 25.62 | 24.44 | 20.71 | 19.91 | > MSTDir[V=15,A=40]| 25.70 | 24.47 | 20.72 | 19.93 | > MSTUndir[V=13,A=40]| 12.89 | 12.82 | 11.15 | 10.72 | > MSTUndir[V=15,A=40]|214.53 |210.60 |182.74 |176.79 | > TIMETABLING| 9.61 | 10.71 | 10.51 | 10.29 | > > That is, code quality improves measurably overall and this would be a > patchset that would be nice to have on mainline, after the first one > RTH approved in principle, and which is just needing minor polishing, > went in. > > > I'd be curious what other people get. > > Regardless of all these benchmarks, I believe one major problem the > currently inliner has is that it's way too slow and thus forces us to > default to inline limits which are too small to generate really efficient > code for deeply nested C++ structures. It's not the inliner, it's the expanders and things that aren't particularly quick, like CSE. But, I actually wanted to see if other compilers had the same issue (if you kick up the inline limits, they become very slow), and sure enough, they do. If I kick the inline limits up on Intel's C++ compiler, it starts to take 5-10 minutes on code it could compile in 10 seconds. This is with both C, and C++. It also just makes the binaries bigger, not faster. This was about a week ago that I did this, it was just a curiosity, so I didn't sit there and make tables or anything. I could, if anyone cares. > > Gerald >