From: David Rees <dbr@greenhydrant.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Simon Kirby <sim@netnation.com>
Subject: Re: gcc-2.95.3 vs gcc-3.0.4
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 00:32:33 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020225003233.A26113@greenhydrant.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3C771D29.942A07C2@starband.net> <20020222204456.O11156@work.bitmover.com> <3C77270A.1CBA02E8@zip.com.au> <20020225080742.GA3122@netnation.com>
In-Reply-To: <20020225080742.GA3122@netnation.com>; from sim@netnation.com on Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 12:07:42AM -0800
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 12:07:42AM -0800, Simon Kirby wrote:
>
> Me too. Everybody says "it's the final code that matters", but a lot of
> us would be more productive if the thing would just compile faster. I've
> done the same (used 2723 during development/debugging) and it helped
> quite a lot.
Well, that's true if you spend most of your time waiting for the compiler to
run, but when it takes longer to compile AND runs slower
(http://www.cs.utk.edu/~rwhaley/ATLAS/gcc30.html) you lose on both counts!
Anyone have good benchmarks to run to compare raw kernel performance to see
how much using RedHat's recent (2.96) or 3.0 compilers to compile the kernel
perform vs the older compilers?
-Dave
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-02-25 8:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-02-23 4:40 gcc-2.95.3 vs gcc-3.0.4 Justin Piszcz
2002-02-23 4:44 ` Larry McVoy
2002-02-23 5:13 ` Justin Piszcz
2002-02-23 5:22 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-23 5:50 ` Richard Gooch
2002-02-23 10:31 ` Benny Sjostrand
2002-02-23 15:00 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-02-25 8:07 ` Simon Kirby
2002-02-25 8:15 ` David S. Miller
2002-02-25 8:32 ` David Rees [this message]
2002-02-25 9:32 ` Ian Castle
2002-02-25 9:52 ` Markus Schaber
2002-02-23 5:40 ` hugang
2002-02-23 5:56 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-23 9:25 ` Paul G. Allen
2002-02-23 13:55 ` gmack
2002-02-23 15:43 ` bert hubert
2002-02-25 0:07 ` Luigi Genoni
2002-02-25 0:32 ` ANN: syscalltrack v0.7 released guy keren
2002-02-25 7:48 ` gcc-2.95.3 vs gcc-3.0.4 Jakub Jelinek
2002-02-25 9:46 ` Luigi Genoni
2002-02-25 9:59 ` Jakub Jelinek
2002-02-25 12:55 ` Jan Hubicka
2002-02-25 16:08 ` Juan Quintela
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=20020225003233.A26113@greenhydrant.com \
--to=dbr@greenhydrant.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sim@netnation.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox