Re: gcc-2.95.3 vs gcc-3.0.4

From: David Rees (dbr@greenhydrant.com)
Date: Mon Feb 25 2002 - 03:32:33 EST


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
-
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 : Thu Feb 28 2002 - 21:00:13 EST