From: eddantes@wanadoo.fr
To: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@aracnet.com>
Cc: Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net>,
Dan Kegel <dank@kegel.com>, "Timothy D. Witham" <wookie@osdl.org>,
Luigi Genoni <kernel@Expansa.sns.it>,
Mike Galbraith <mikeg@wen-online.de>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
stp@osdl.org
Subject: Re: Regression testing of 2.4.x before release?
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 01:29:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C3F8377.8010603@wanadoo.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0201111600560.19843-100000@shell1.aracnet.com>
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
[snip]
> One particular application for which gcc 3.x *and* gcc 2.96.x are
> seriously deficient, at least on Intel/AMD 32-bit systems, is the
> high-performance linear algebra library Atlas. As a result, *my* default
> for compiling numerical applications is the Atlas-recommended one,
> 2.95.3. For the kernel, I use whatever the Red Hat 7.2 default is.
>
Mmhh... Just remember gcc 2.96.x is NOT a regular gcc release, you can
check at:
http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/releases.html
AFAIK, it is a RH-hacked pre-3.0, which is probably not the best thing
to use for anything.
The 3.x series are know to generate pretty slow code, anyway. So I bet
your experience is pretty normal. I still stick with 2.95.[34] for x86
kernel compile, although I'm using 3.0 for all purposes on Hitashi SH,
as only gcc>=3.0 correctly supports the sh4.
/dantes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-01-12 0:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.33.0111040832060.364-100000@mikeg.weiden.de>
2001-11-04 17:58 ` Regression testing of 2.4.x before release? Dan Kegel
2001-11-04 19:09 ` Luigi Genoni
2001-11-05 1:51 ` Dan Kegel
2001-11-05 16:39 ` Timothy D. Witham
2001-11-12 6:24 ` Dan Kegel
2002-01-10 23:50 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-01-12 0:04 ` M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
2002-01-12 0:29 ` eddantes [this message]
2002-01-12 0:34 ` [OT] " Kurt Garloff
2002-01-10 23:50 ` Daniel Phillips
2001-11-12 19:07 ` Timothy D. Witham
2001-11-13 4:53 ` Dan Kegel
2001-11-13 22:00 ` STP for automated GCC testing (was Re: Regression testing of 2.4.x beforerelease?) Bryce Harrington
2001-11-04 7:03 Regression testing of 2.4.x before release? Dan Kegel
2001-11-04 7:15 ` Ted Deppner
2001-11-04 12:04 ` Tahar
2001-11-04 17:27 ` Ted Deppner
2001-11-04 18:41 ` Luigi Genoni
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3C3F8377.8010603@wanadoo.fr \
--to=eddantes@wanadoo.fr \
--cc=dank@kegel.com \
--cc=kernel@Expansa.sns.it \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mikeg@wen-online.de \
--cc=phillips@bonn-fries.net \
--cc=stp@osdl.org \
--cc=wookie@osdl.org \
--cc=znmeb@aracnet.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).