[OT] Re: Regression testing of 2.4.x before release?

From: Kurt Garloff (garloff@suse.de)
Date: Fri Jan 11 2002 - 19:34:14 EST

Hi,

On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 04:04:59PM -0800, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
> 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.

One of the problems of gcc-3 is taking decisions when to inline and when
not. This can hurt numerical code a lot, especially C++.
You may want to use -finline-limit-XXX to tune.
http://www.garloff.de/kurt/freesoft/gcc/
v1 of my patch went into 3.0.3, some version (don't know which) into
mainline, so 3.0.3 should do better.

Regards, 

-- 
Kurt Garloff  <garloff@suse.de>                          Eindhoven, NL
GPG key: See mail header, key servers         Linux kernel development
SuSE GmbH, Nuernberg, DE                                SCSI, Security
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 15 2002 - 21:00:37 EST