Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

LLVM's Clang Is Finally The FreeBSD x86 Compiler

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • LLVM's Clang Is Finally The FreeBSD x86 Compiler

    Phoronix: LLVM's Clang Is Finally The FreeBSD x86 Compiler

    After talking about FreeBSD's transition to Clang as the default C/C++ compiler rather than GCC, the move has finally happened where for x86/x86_64 systems the LLVM-based compiler has replaced GCC...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTIyMzM

  • #2
    So FreeBSD is, as always, faster than the Linux guys.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Cthulhux View Post
      So FreeBSD is, as always, faster than the Linux guys.
      Actually, after this change, it will be slower :P

      Comment


      • #4
        Why should it?

        Comment


        • #5
          I would like to see a benchmark (also on Linux) with with normal compiler settings (-O2 or -Os ... . flags binary distributions are using).

          Most of the GCC vs. clang benchmarks on this site are totally useless, because only a few people in the world compile their software with those unstable flags (-O3 -march=native -ffast-math, ...).

          It would be nice to see how the compilers perform on more common flags, like -O2 and -Os without CPU-specific optimizations.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
            Actually, after this change, it will be slower :P
            This change is an improvement over GCC 4.2.x, which is what FreeBSD was using previously.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Cthulhux View Post
              Why should it?
              Because compiling faster and using less RAM, doesn't mean the end result of this compilation is better performing for any reason. It could be, but it is indicated it's not. Tiny C Compiler can probably use much less time and RAM than Clang, too ..

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by ryao View Post
                This change is an improvement over GCC 4.2.x, which is what FreeBSD was using previously.
                I would like to see actual numbers. I think it is still not the case for common benchmarks.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by ryao View Post
                  This change is an improvement over GCC 4.2.x, which is what FreeBSD was using previously.
                  But he said "faster than Linux", and Linux distros have all moved beyond 4.2.x

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Rigaldo View Post
                    It could be, but it is indicated it's not.
                    Where do you see the indication here?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Cthulhux View Post
                      Where do you see the indication here?
                      Various benchmarks showing many cases of Clang being slower than GCC among other things. Do you think Clang(BSD's new default compiler) uses less resources due to sorcery or something?
                      I doubt Clang will be as fast after being able to make well optimized binaries. See Tiny C Compiler example. It's much faster but produces much less inefficient code.

                      Let me ask you in return, why do you believe BSD will now be or is faster than Linux?(And is it?)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Rigaldo View Post
                        Let me ask you in return, why do you believe BSD will now be or is faster than Linux?(And is it?)
                        I meant: They're faster adapting the CLANG compiler. But after all, I don't know "the only true" benchmarks.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Rigaldo View Post
                          Various benchmarks showing many cases of Clang being slower than GCC among other things. Do you think Clang(BSD's new default compiler) uses less resources due to sorcery or something?
                          I doubt Clang will be as fast after being able to make well optimized binaries. See Tiny C Compiler example. It's much faster but produces much less inefficient code.

                          Let me ask you in return, why do you believe BSD will now be or is faster than Linux?(And is it?)
                          Cite those benchmarks ... I hope those benchmarks are contextualized ( BSD benchmarks comparing the BSD situation: GCC4.2 vs latest Clang )
                          About OS performance ... well, compiler does its part, but thinking it's the only thing is just nonsense.

                          In any case Paws Up for the FreeBSD people for switching to a wayy better c/c++ stack ( this also includes libc++, libcxxrt and some work with binutils kind of tools ) and for putting work into this.
                          It would interesting to do some benchmarks, but with the new stack in place ... I kinda doubt that we would loose performance against an raging old version of GCC, but I would like to see how the other improvements interact with that (because it wasn't just Clang)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Cthulhux View Post
                            So FreeBSD is, as always, faster than the Linux guys.
                            How is KMS working for you?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Cthulhux View Post
                              I meant: They're faster adapting the CLANG compiler. But after all, I don't know "the only true" benchmarks.
                              Since when is that something that makes an OS good? That it adopts something (which isn't even a clear improvement) for whatever reason.
                              It did not adapt systemd with that logic it would make it a bad OS. There is no Gnome 3 for BSD they're still at 2.3.x something. What does that tell us? Nothing.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X