On 25 Feb 2009, at 16:21, Alexander.Gorshenev at Sun.COM wrote: > On Wed, 25 Feb 2009, Chris Ridd wrote: > >> >> On 24 Feb 2009, at 20:23, C. Bergstr?m wrote: >> >>> Since the xorg driver size issue I've been looking at the objdump >>> of some binaries and the code generation between sun cc, gcc and >>> open64.. >>> CSiBE gave some interesting rough size comparison numbers, but was >>> only able to compare open64/gcc.. Besides things like >>> SPEC2000int.. what else if any are people using to check for >>> performance/size regressions in the sun toolchain? I know there's >>> full time employees making sure solaris stays top notch, but can >>> any of these details/sources be published? >> >> I noticed that Phoronix recently did some comparisons between gcc >> and SS 12. >
[link deleted] > Oh, not again! There are serious apples vs. oranges issues in the > comparison to the level making it completely irrelevant. They compare > optimized compilations of one compiler with no-opt compilations of > another compiler. They compare openmp builds of one compiler with > non-openmp builds of another. They did only test default options for each compiler... which is a bit odd, and I agree it makes the tests fairly meaningless. > The build and run logs or at least details are not provided, so people > around trying to reproduce the result get completely different > figures. > > See for example the comments to the article itself. > http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15534&page=2 They did note that they were talking to someone on the SS team about the results. Any ideas who, and what their comments were? Cheers, Chris
