[gambit-list] [Fwd: Measuring FSF gcc from 4.1.2 to today on various benchmarks.]

Bradley Lucier lucier at math.purdue.edu
Fri May 29 16:04:10 EDT 2009


I've run some statistics with various versions of gcc and sent the
following message to the gcc mail list, which is archived at

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/

Perhaps some of you may be interested.

Brad

-------- Forwarded Message --------
> From: Bradley Lucier <lucier at math.purdue.edu>
> To: gcc at gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Bradley Lucier <lucier at math.purdue.edu>
> Subject: Measuring FSF gcc from 4.1.2 to today on various benchmarks.
> Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 15:58:00 -0400
> 
> I've put at
> 
> http://www.math.purdue.edu/~lucier/bugzilla/9/
> 
> some compile-time and run-time statistics related to PR 39157 and PR
> 33928 and compile times and run times for the programs in the Gambit
> Scheme benchmark suite.  The statistics are for 4.1.2 release, 4.2.4
> release, 4.3.3 release, 4.4.1 20090522, 4.5.0 20090521 (revision
> 147758), and 4.5.0 20090521 (revision 147758) with
> -fno-forward-propagate; they use (mainly) the set of options
> 
> -O1 -fno-math-errno -fschedule-insns2 -fno-trapping-math -fno-strict-aliasing -fwrapv -fomit-frame-pointer -fPIC -fno-common -mieee-fp
> 
> on a Core 2 quad processor (running basically nothing else at the time).
> 
> I would conclude from the statistics that, right now, the cost of
> including -fforward-propagate in -O1 overrides any performance benefit
> that may result.
> 
> Brad
> 



More information about the Gambit-list mailing list