Mail Archives: pgcc/1999/05/19/12:59:43
Damjan Glad wrote:
>
> I compiled bzip2 using:
> gcc 2.7.2.3
> gcc 2.8.1
> egcs 1.1.2
> pgcc 1.1.2
>
> performed compresion tests on 20 meg tar file (10 megs of binaries and 10
> megs of texts)
>
> running on celeron 333a I got:
>
> gcc 2.7.2.3 53 seconds
> gcc 2.8.1 53 seconds
> egcs 1.1.2 54 seconds
> pgcc 1.1.3 56 seconds
>
> ??
>
> gcc switches were -O3 -funroll-loops -fomit-frame-pointer -m486
> egcs 1.1.2 -O6 -funroll-loops -fomit-frame-pointer -mpentiumpro
> pgcc 1.1.3 -O2 -funroll-loops -fomit-frame-pointer -mpentiumpro
>
> pgcc 1.1.3 generates wrong code if I use -O[3456] so I didn't test it (I
> didn't try to trace whitch specific -f optimization flag causes this).
>
> bzip2 compiled using -O2 on egcs was compressing for more than 57 seconds.
>
> I didn't try to time decompressing...
Well, last time, I did that, I was disappointed about the performance
decrease, too. Only the pervertest options gave a slight increase, but
all egcs/pgcc versions were significantly bigger, than the gcc versions.
Interessingly, most of the time during compressing with bzip2 is
taken by one one routine... I thought a certain time about it,
but got no idea, how to improve it efficiently...
> Are there any other tests? Is it really worth it?
>
> Damjan Glad
Hans-Peter
- Raw text -