[lkml]   [2002]   [Sep]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [BENCHMARK] Corrected gcc3.2 v gcc2.95.3 contest results
    On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 12:24:49AM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
    > That is the system I was considering. I just need to run enough benchmarks to
    > make this worthwhile though. That means about 5 for each it seems - which may
    > take me a while. A basic mean will suffice for a measure of central tendency. I
    > also need to quote some measure of variability. Standard deviation?

    BTW: Have you tried gcc 3.2 with say -finline-limit=2000 too?
    By default gcc 3.2 has for usual C code smaller inlining cutoff, so the IO
    difference might as well be because some important, but big function was
    inlined by 2.95.x and not by 3.2.x. On the other side there is
    __attribute__((always_inline)) which you can use to tell gcc you don't
    want any cutoff for a particular function.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:29    [W:0.020 / U:33.760 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site