------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-21 14:32
-------
Here is the results on powerpc-darwin for Apple's 3.3 and an almost new mainline:
Machine Info
--------------------
kernel : 7.4.1
Tool Info
--------------------
Reading specs from /usr/libexec/gcc/darwin/ppc/3.3/specs
Thread model: posix
gcc version 3.3 20030304 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 1495)
--------------------
3.3/temp contains compiler output from the '-save-temps' switch
results
--------------------
ackermann 13: ack(3,13): 65533 515.266 seconds (omit-frame-pointer)
ackermann 13: ack(3,13): 65533 492.83 seconds (with-frame-pointer)
hash2 3000: 1 9999 3000 29997000 9.48383 seconds (omit-frame-pointer)
hash2 3000: 1 9999 3000 29997000 10.2518 seconds (with-frame-pointer)
heapsort 10000000: 0.9999928555 34.5854 seconds (omit-frame-pointer)
heapsort 10000000: 0.9999928555 31.9553 seconds (with-frame-pointer)
nestedloop 45: 729000000 9.95707 seconds (omit-frame-pointer)
nestedloop 45: 729000000 12.278 seconds (with-frame-pointer)
random 300000000: 92.485425240 18.6898 seconds (omit-frame-pointer)
random 300000000: 92.485425240 18.4003 seconds (with-frame-pointer)
sieve 100000: Count: 1028 8.91343 seconds (omit-frame-pointer)
sieve 100000: Count: 1028 11.2786 seconds (with-frame-pointer)
----
Machine Info
--------------------
kernel : 7.4.1
Tool Info
--------------------
Reading specs from /Users/pinskia/local/lib/gcc/powerpc-apple-darwin7.4.1/4.0.0/specs
Configured with: /Users/pinskia/src/local/gcc/configure --prefix=/Users/pinskia/local
--enable-
languages=c,java,objc,f95 --disable-werror
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.0.0 20041017 (experimental)
--------------------
4.0.0/temp contains compiler output from the '-save-temps' switch
results
--------------------
ackermann 13: ack(3,13): 65533 202.369 seconds (omit-frame-pointer)
ackermann 13: ack(3,13): 65533 227.047 seconds (with-frame-pointer)
hash2 3000: 1 9999 3000 29997000 9.09942 seconds (omit-frame-pointer)
hash2 3000: 1 9999 3000 29997000 9.13645 seconds (with-frame-pointer)
heapsort 10000000: 0.9999928555 37.7239 seconds (omit-frame-pointer)
heapsort 10000000: 0.9999928555 34.8575 seconds (with-frame-pointer)
nestedloop 45: 729000000 14.157 seconds (omit-frame-pointer)
nestedloop 45: 729000000 15.402 seconds (with-frame-pointer)
random 300000000: 92.485425240 6.88415 seconds (omit-frame-pointer)
random 300000000: 92.485425240 6.97493 seconds (with-frame-pointer)
sieve 100000: Count: 1028 11.6892 seconds (omit-frame-pointer)
sieve 100000: Count: 1028 10.4483 seconds (with-frame-pointer)
As you can see that we do much better on the mainline for ackermann and random but
worse on
nestedloop
So this might be able to close now as we have two progressions and one regression.
And the one
regression is an artificial testcase:
x = 0;
for (int a=0; a<n; ++a)
for (int b=0; b<n; ++b)
for (int c=0; c<n; ++c)
for (int d=0; d<n; ++d)
for (int e=0; e<n; ++e)
for (int f=0; f<n; ++f)
x++;
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16703
