What was the size of uncompressed kernel binaries?
This is a simple (and somewhat inaccurate) measure of compiler
improvement ;)
> Don't let this get out, but egcs-2.91.66 compiled FFT code
> works about 50 percent of the speed of whatever M$ uses for
> Visual C++ Version 6.0 I was awfully disheartened when I
Yes. M$ (and some other compilers) beat GCC badly.
> found that identical code executed twice as fast on M$ than
> it does on Linux. I tried to isolate what was causing the
> difference. So I replaced 'hypot()' with some 'C' code that
> does sqrt(x^2 + y^2) just to see if it was the 'C' library.
> It didn't help. When I find out what type (section) of code
> is running slower, I'll report. In the meantime, it's fast
> enough, but I don't like being beat by M$.
I'm afraid it's code generation engine. It is just worse than
M$ or Intel's one. It is not easily fixable,
GCC folks have tremendous task at hand.
I wonder whether some big companies supposedly supporting
Linux (e.g. Intel) can help GCC team (for example by giving
away some code and/or developer time).
-- vda - 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/