From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Gregory Heytings via "Emacs development discussions." Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: The Emacs master is much slower than the emacs-27 branch. Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2020 15:15:40 +0000 Message-ID: References: <877dpyzg9d.fsf@rub.de> <87czzpsyqn.fsf@gmx.net> <83o8j9eqwx.fsf@gnu.org> <874kl1spe9.fsf@gmx.net> <83blf9em55.fsf@gnu.org> <87zh2tr82r.fsf@gmx.net> <87v9dhr7i5.fsf@gmx.net> <838sadefiw.fsf@gnu.org> <83360le421.fsf@gnu.org> <83y2idcn8q.fsf@gnu.org> <83wnxxcmjr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tut0d7e9.fsf@gnu.org> <83h7p0d37y.fsf@gnu.org> <83ft4kd2ym.fsf@gnu.org> <83eek4d2co.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Gregory Heytings Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="36701"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Alpine 2.22 (NEB 394 2020-01-19) Cc: acm@muc.de, stephen.berman@gmx.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 05 16:17:08 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1klZJ6-0009S4-Sc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 05 Dec 2020 16:17:08 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48224 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1klZJ5-0004Ye-Sj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 05 Dec 2020 10:17:07 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34752) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1klZHv-0003iA-Hf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 Dec 2020 10:15:55 -0500 Original-Received: from mx.sdf.org ([205.166.94.24]:61354) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1klZHt-0005EW-Ec; Sat, 05 Dec 2020 10:15:55 -0500 Original-Received: from sdf.org (IDENT:ghe@faeroes.freeshell.org [205.166.94.9]) by mx.sdf.org (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTPS id 0B5FFhXw029148 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256 bits) verified NO); Sat, 5 Dec 2020 15:15:43 GMT Original-Received: (from ghe@localhost) by sdf.org (8.15.2/8.12.8/Submit) id 0B5FGJYr002088; Sat, 5 Dec 2020 15:16:19 GMT In-Reply-To: <83eek4d2co.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=205.166.94.24; envelope-from=ghe@sdf.org; helo=mx.sdf.org X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:260368 Archived-At: > > It occurred to me that the differences in the relative performance could > be due to a different GCC version and/ > GCC is not the problem here, I just ran the same benchmark with Emacs 27 compiled with different versions of GCC: | GCC 8.4 | GCC 9.3 | GCC 10.2 | -Og | ~67s | ~68s | ~67s | -O0 | ~63s | ~63s | ~63s | -O1 | ~26s | ~27s | ~26s | -O2 | ~18s | ~18s | ~18s | -O3 | ~18s | ~17s | ~17s | > > or the effect of inlining on 32-bit code vs 64-bit code produced by GCC. > That's possible indeed.