Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 8 Feb 2003 11:39:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 8 Feb 2003 11:39:28 -0500 Received: from [195.39.17.254] ([195.39.17.254]:9988 "EHLO Elf.ucw.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 8 Feb 2003 11:38:06 -0500 Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 17:09:55 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Linus Torvalds Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: gcc 2.95 vs 3.21 performance Message-ID: <20030207160955.GG345@elf.ucw.cz> References: <1044385759.1861.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200302041935.h14JZ69G002675@darkstar.example.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1718 Lines: 39 Hi! > >> I'm hesitant to enter into this. But from my own experience > >> the issue with big companies supporting these sort of changes > >> in gcc have more to do with the acceptance process of changes > >> into gcc than a lack of desire on the large companies part. > > > >Maybe we should create a KGCC fork, optimise it for kernel > >complilations, then try to get our changes merged back in to GCC > >mainline at a later date. > > That's not really the problem. > > I think the problem with gcc is that many of the developers are actually > much more interested in Ada or C++ (or even Fortran!), than in plain > old-fashioned C. So it's not a kernel issue per se, gcc is slow to > compile _any_ C project. > > And a lot of the optimizations gcc does aren't even interesting to most > C projects. Most "old-fashioned" C projects tend to be written in ways > that mean that the most important optimizations are the truly trivial > ones, and then doing good register allocation. > > I'd love to see a small - and fast - C compiler, and I'd be willing to > make kernel changes to make it work with it. What about gcc-1.4 or something like that? If you go back in time, you'll find gcc is getting smaller and faster ;-). Actually making kernel compile with gcc-2.7.2 should make it few times faster than gcc-3.2... Pavel -- Worst form of spam? Adding advertisment signatures ala sourceforge.net. What goes next? Inserting advertisment *into* email? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/