Message-ID: <376F3BF2.354276D8@uiuc.edu>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 02:32:02 -0500
From: Jon <jcmcknny AT uiuc DOT edu>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: pgcc does better, reboot, then does terrible!
References: <3767970F DOT 307F679C AT uiuc DOT edu> <19990617214221 DOT C867 AT cerebro DOT laendle> <376E9F8F DOT FC8EC124 AT uiuc DOT edu> <19990621235011 DOT B5943 AT cerebro DOT laendle>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com

Marc Lehmann wrote:
> - you haven't changed anything: hardware error

But the old binary is still faster!  So can't be that.

> - you have changed the compiler settings

Possible, but not probable as I became very familiar with the settings
and in one particular dir had a totally old-good just-compiled-before
version(i.e. make didn't make anything new, etc.).  I rm *.o and remade
the bin and walla, different and slow.

> - you have replaced the library or compiler in between

ldd reports same exact libraries(hex code agrees).

Did you look at my other message about the contents of the binaries?  It
seems odd.  I KNOW that fast one was compiled with pgcc, but while the
new-slow binary has references internally about pgcc+egcs the old-fast
one only refers to egcs.  I definitely used the -mcpu=pentiumpro
-march=pentiumpro options with the fast and slow one, so it was always
pgcc.  No doubt.

> 
> > I get:
> >
> > cmp: EOF on ./twod
> >   44387  133161  665805
> 
> _MANY_ differences.

Ya, as I mentioned in the other email.

> > But as I mentioned in a new mail, they do have odd differences.

This comment is a reference to the human readable portions of the binary
I mentioned in my other email.

Can you take a look at that?

> Most probably a look at the binaries won't help.

Well, it might.  One obvious difference is the one I mentioned in the
other email(and here shortly).

-Jon