From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_REJECT, MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from durendal.skynet.be (durendal.skynet.be [195.238.3.128]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D44562019F47 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 05:42:15 -0500 (CDT) Received: from adsl-32979.turboline.skynet.be (adsl-32979.turboline.skynet.be [217.136.0.211]) by durendal.skynet.be (8.11.6/8.11.6/Skynet-OUT-2.16) with ESMTP id g385XEM09651 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 07:33:14 +0200 (MET DST) (envelope-from ) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GCC 3 Vs GCC 2 and some other stuff From: Geert Bevin To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <20020408044612.4489e915.spider@gentoo.org> References: <20020408044612.4489e915.spider@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Evolution/1.0.2- Date: 08 Apr 2002 07:33:13 +0200 Message-Id: <1018243994.16315.0.camel@oak.uwyn.office> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: abfa525f-7b42-4008-8fe8-ac9e142590db X-Archives-Hash: c5b057b984aa2273bc72f2a2123b16cf What were you benchmarking since you never even mentioned that, the compilation of the software or the resulting executable's performance. The first one seems pretty useless to me, while the latter does make sense. On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 04:46, Spider wrote: > I know well that this is was completely unscientific and unreproductible > behaviour, with only one run and so on. > > PDC20265: chipset revision 2 > PDC20265: not 100% native mode: will probe irqs later > PDC20265: (U)DMA Burst Bit ENABLED Primary PCI Mode Secondary PCI Mode. > ide2: BM-DMA at 0x7400-0x7407, BIOS settings: hde:DMA, hdf:pio > ide3: BM-DMA at 0x7408-0x740f, BIOS settings: hdg:pio, hdh:pio > > hde: Maxtor 5T030H3, ATA DISK drive > its an Athlon t-bird 1GHz > MemTotal: 288548 kB > (PC-100 SDRAM) > > Filesystem on the drive used for compilations are ReiserFS. > > Using r5 hash to sort names > ReiserFS version 3.6.25 > > also, the fact that I dont use the same compiler flags for both > compilers are a dead giveaway. > > Better code, I can't speak for. More tests, I can, I've had to patch up > some c++ code in order to fit the stricter tests, something I consider > good. > > > cpu idle time doesn't matter much when diskaccess is ventured, should I > ever intend to do a good benchmark I'd use tmpfs for the whole process, > and make sure I dont run out of RAM while doing it. This is a user > comparsion, the feeling of how long things take to compile c++. > > And yes, the machine was in "normal use" at the time. Xchat, sylpheed > and some aterm's. bad behaviour for a benchmarker. But standard for me > whenever I compile things, and thats how I wanted the comparsion done. > > kernel is for once the default gentoo one, something I seldom use > normally. (I prefer -jam series) > > //Spider > > > > > > > So, regarding your benchmarks Spider. There is something wrong, > > definately. And I think our gentoo kernel heads around here should > > take a close look at it. Sure, GCC 3.X *is* slower on compilation > > time, however, your tests show a very disturbing fact: Under some > > circumstances, your CPU seems to spend unreasonable amount of time not > > doing anything. This could be an indication of a bigger issue, > > possibly a configuration or a hardware issue. There might be an issue > > going on with the cache or the filesystem or even the loader. How much > > memory the PC you used has and what kind of drive and filesystem did > > you use? (I hope that all this is not a side effect of one of the > > Gentoo kernel patches...) > > > > > -- > begin happy99.exe > This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature! > See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information. > end -- Geert Bevin Uwyn "Use what you need" Lambermontlaan 148 http://www.uwyn.com 1030 Brussels gbevin@uwyn.com Tel & Fax +32 2 245 41 06