From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 22 Sep 2002 23:42:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 22 Sep 2002 23:42:36 -0400 Received: from svr-ganmtc-appserv-mgmt.ncf.coxexpress.com ([24.136.46.5]:39944 "EHLO svr-ganmtc-appserv-mgmt.ncf.coxexpress.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 22 Sep 2002 23:42:34 -0400 Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] gcc3.2 v 2.95.3 (contest and linux-2.5.38) From: Robert Love To: Andrew Morton Cc: Con Kolivas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <3D8E8D7F.810EF57F@digeo.com> References: <1032750261.3d8e84b5486a9@kolivas.net> <3D8E8D7F.810EF57F@digeo.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 Date: 22 Sep 2002 23:47:46 -0400 Message-Id: <1032752867.962.1012.camel@phantasy> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2002-09-22 at 23:41, Andrew Morton wrote: > Try gcc-2.91.66. It might break the 45 second mark. > > > IO Full Load: > > Kernel Time CPU > > 2.5.38 170.21 42% > > 2.5.38-gcc32 1405.25 8% > > The streaming write is stalling gcc's read for long enough for gcc's > working set to be evicted. And the working set cannot be reestablished > because the streaming write prevents it. Meltdown. > > I have fixed this. Hang around. Ehh, I was under the impression he was benchmarking kernels compiled WITH these compilers, using contest? Your post seems to imply he was using the compilers as the benchmark. If so, I retract my previous post - I know gcc 3.x is slow as puke. I think, however, he is comparing the resulting kernels, in which case there is a serious issue at hand... Robert Love