Originally posted by avis
View Post
GCC 14 vs. LLVM Clang 18 Compiler Performance On Fedora 40
Collapse
X
-
Good we have 2 OS compilers sort of competing with each other, more benefits and choices for us.
-
-
At this point I am not expecting any compiler to beat GCC after averaged in a set of benchmarks like Michael did here. GCC 14 is also great with building the latest kernel version. I have been using with Fedora 40 on 8 (or so) computers and there are no problems at all. I tried LLVM before for building Linux kernel, but I did not see any performance miracles there. It is just as good as GCC. Just take your pick.
Leave a comment:
-
-
Originally posted by carewolf View Post
The performce bugs I have filed has been adressed, especially if you debug it down to general cases and assembler. Though I also fixed a few of them myself. The only one I can remember that wasn't fixed, was because it was caused by a specific micro-ops limit in Sandybridge processors, so slightly more agressive optimization caused a regression, but they didn't want to hardcore such specific limits for all processors. clang also doesnt have that.
Leave a comment:
-
-
Originally posted by carewolf View Post
--param max-completely-peel-times=30
Leave a comment:
-
-
Originally posted by vladpetric View Post
For ICEs and bad output, I agree. Not so for performance bugs in my experience.
Leave a comment:
-
-
Originally posted by avis View PostNot a lot of sense in comparing video codecs because they include hand written assembly for most important/heavy parts of processing, so the compiler's role is quite minimal.
SMHasher SHA3-256 could be sped up on GCC a lot: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113235
No fix is proposed just yet.
Leave a comment:
-
-
Originally posted by avis View Post
99% of bugs that I've filed against GCC received proper attention. No idea why you get this treatment. Maybe you could provide the links to the appropriate bug reports.
Leave a comment:
-
Leave a comment: