From: eddantes@wanadoo.fr
To: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@aracnet.com>
Cc: Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net>,
Dan Kegel <dank@kegel.com>, "Timothy D. Witham" <wookie@osdl.org>,
Luigi Genoni <kernel@Expansa.sns.it>,
Mike Galbraith <mikeg@wen-online.de>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
stp@osdl.org
Subject: Re: Regression testing of 2.4.x before release?
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 01:29:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C3F8377.8010603@wanadoo.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0201111600560.19843-100000@shell1.aracnet.com>
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
[snip]
> One particular application for which gcc 3.x *and* gcc 2.96.x are
> seriously deficient, at least on Intel/AMD 32-bit systems, is the
> high-performance linear algebra library Atlas. As a result, *my* default
> for compiling numerical applications is the Atlas-recommended one,
> 2.95.3. For the kernel, I use whatever the Red Hat 7.2 default is.
>
Mmhh... Just remember gcc 2.96.x is NOT a regular gcc release, you can
check at:
http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/releases.html
AFAIK, it is a RH-hacked pre-3.0, which is probably not the best thing
to use for anything.
The 3.x series are know to generate pretty slow code, anyway. So I bet
your experience is pretty normal. I still stick with 2.95.[34] for x86
kernel compile, although I'm using 3.0 for all purposes on Hitashi SH,
as only gcc>=3.0 correctly supports the sh4.
/dantes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-01-12 0:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.33.0111040832060.364-100000@mikeg.weiden.de>
2001-11-04 17:58 ` Regression testing of 2.4.x before release? Dan Kegel
2001-11-04 19:09 ` Luigi Genoni
2001-11-05 1:51 ` Dan Kegel
2001-11-05 16:39 ` Timothy D. Witham
2001-11-12 6:24 ` Dan Kegel
2001-11-12 19:07 ` Timothy D. Witham
2001-11-13 4:53 ` Dan Kegel
2001-11-13 22:00 ` STP for automated GCC testing (was Re: Regression testing of 2.4.x beforerelease?) Bryce Harrington
2002-01-10 23:50 ` Regression testing of 2.4.x before release? Daniel Phillips
2002-01-10 23:50 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-01-12 0:04 ` M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
2002-01-12 0:29 ` eddantes [this message]
2002-01-12 0:34 ` [OT] " Kurt Garloff
2001-11-04 7:03 Dan Kegel
2001-11-04 7:15 ` Ted Deppner
2001-11-04 12:04 ` Tahar
2001-11-04 17:27 ` Ted Deppner
2001-11-04 18:41 ` Luigi Genoni
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3C3F8377.8010603@wanadoo.fr \
--to=eddantes@wanadoo.fr \
--cc=dank@kegel.com \
--cc=kernel@Expansa.sns.it \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mikeg@wen-online.de \
--cc=phillips@bonn-fries.net \
--cc=stp@osdl.org \
--cc=wookie@osdl.org \
--cc=znmeb@aracnet.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.