> Most of the improvement from my original post comes from
> gnu/javax/swing/text/html/parser/HTML_401F.deps, for which the compile time
> went from over 100 minutes to below 10 (twice due to multilib). For all the
> other pieces of code the saving (if any) was clearly well below a factor 2.
> Doe
A full bootstrap took 12h 38' on my machine (1.8Ghz G5) minus probably ~1h
diverted for
other tasks. Although I did not measured accurately this time before, it could
be my
fastest one. Most of the improvement from my original post comes from
gnu/javax/swing/text/html/parser/HTML_401F.deps, for
> I have applied the "final" patch, if you want to re-test.
Slightly better, but not much (7 min for a full-checking bootstrap).
--
Eric Botcazou
On 10/29/07, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/29/07, Eric Botcazou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Let's see what the results are on the now "optimal" first strategy.
> >
> > Far better, but I've still a 51 min gap on a full checking bootstrap.
>
> More tweaks to come.
I have a
On 10/29/07, Eric Botcazou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Let's see what the results are on the now "optimal" first strategy.
>
> Far better, but I've still a 51 min gap on a full checking bootstrap.
More tweaks to come.
Richard.
> Let's see what the results are on the now "optimal" first strategy.
Far better, but I've still a 51 min gap on a full checking bootstrap.
--
Eric Botcazou
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Oct 2007, David Daney wrote:
>
>>> On i386-freebsd the number I identified earlier this year was 700MB,
>>> 512MB definitely _not_ being sufficient. I'd be very interested in
>>> your measurements, perhaps we can reduce the limit somewhat!
>>>
>> I r
There is something I don't understand: why the problem shows only (mainly) in
jc1?
If a similar increase had happened in gfortran, I (and others) would have seen
it.
Dominique
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007, David Daney wrote:
>> On i386-freebsd the number I identified earlier this year was 700MB,
>> 512MB definitely _not_ being sufficient. I'd be very interested in
>> your measurements, perhaps we can reduce the limit somewhat!
> I regularly bootstrap c,c++,java on a mips-linu
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> Don't be sorry, I can reproduce a compilation time surge for libjava on
>> my machine (AMD64, 2.4 GHz, 1 GB). In particular, HTML_401F.o now
>> takes 40 min to compile for each version of the library.
>>
>> The surge comes from the fix for PR tree-
On 10/28/07, Eric Botcazou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm working on it.
>
> Thanks. However, don't we simply void the benefit of memory partitioning by
> recursing on the MPTs?
Yes. At least what compile-time is concerned (we still have less VOPs). The
patch I just committed avoids some/mo
> I'm working on it.
Thanks. However, don't we simply void the benefit of memory partitioning by
recursing on the MPTs?
--
Eric Botcazou
On 10/28/07, Eric Botcazou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I never noticed that this part was so long and I was too eager to do
> > something else with the CPU. Sorry for the noise.
>
> Don't be sorry, I can reproduce a compilation time surge for libjava on my
> machine (AMD64, 2.4 GHz, 1 GB). In p
> I never noticed that this part was so long and I was too eager to do
> something else with the CPU. Sorry for the noise.
Don't be sorry, I can reproduce a compilation time surge for libjava on my
machine (AMD64, 2.4 GHz, 1 GB). In particular, HTML_401F.o now takes 40 min
to compile for each v
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Oct 2007, David Daney wrote:
>
>> You need at least 256MB of memory to compile HTML_401F. A lot of time
>> is also useful. If the system is not thrashing, I would give it a
>> couple of hours before calling it broken.
>>
>
> Have we reduced memory consum
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007, David Daney wrote:
> You need at least 256MB of memory to compile HTML_401F. A lot of time
> is also useful. If the system is not thrashing, I would give it a
> couple of hours before calling it broken.
Have we reduced memory consumption recently? On i386-freebsd the number
David,
> ... I would give it a couple of hours before calling it broken.
You are right, a small "couple" of hours is need for the three stages: slightly
less than two hours on my machine (1.8Ghz G5). I never noticed that this part
was so long and I was too eager to do something else with the CPU.
Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
> On powerpc-apple-darwin8, I killed jc1 after it took over 37:29.81 at:
>
> ...
> echo
../../../../gcc-4.3-work/libjava/classpath/lib/gnu/javax/swing/text/html/parser/HTML_401F*.class>
gnu/javax/swing/text/html/parser/HTML_401F.list
> /bin/sh ./libtool --tag=GCJ --mode=c
On powerpc-apple-darwin8, I killed jc1 after it took over 37:29.81 at:
...
echo
../../../../gcc-4.3-work/libjava/classpath/lib/gnu/javax/swing/text/html/parser/HTML_401F*.class>
gnu/javax/swing/text/html/parser/HTML_401F.list
/bin/sh ./libtool --tag=GCJ --mode=compile /opt/gcc/darwin_buildw/gcc/
19 matches
Mail list logo
