http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55674
--- Comment #17 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> 2012-12-18 17:25:37 UTC --- > I did some measurements with tramp3d and in this case > the default (999) gives the best performance: > > par. size time > -------------------- > 999 955859 3.71752 > 990 933390 3.73969 > 980 904718 3.84547 > ... " " > 750 904718 3.84769 > 740 837654 7.67177 > 600 836024 8.80879 Yep, tramp3d is unforutnately quite special case: we measure the number of instructions prior late optimization, while in tramp3d over 90% of code disappear as a result of inlining and further simplification, so we get GIGO problem... I am not sure how to handle these things in any resonable way.... I will test couple of values on spec2k this week and lets see how things scale elsewhere. Honza
