From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 27 09:16:49 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3DC7106566B; Tue, 27 Apr 2010 09:16:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kamikaze@bsdforen.de) Received: from mail.bsdforen.de (bsdforen.de [212.204.60.79]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 859EE8FC14; Tue, 27 Apr 2010 09:16:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mobileKamikaze.norad (unknown [188.46.73.58]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.bsdforen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E5068A1BC9; Tue, 27 Apr 2010 11:16:24 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4BD6AB65.1010503@bsdforen.de> Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 11:16:21 +0200 From: Dominic Fandrey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100331 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Roman Divacky References: <4BD68275.6020509@bsdforen.de> <20100427080518.GA31918@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20100427080518.GA31918@freebsd.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ClangBSD build failures X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 09:16:49 -0000 On 27/04/2010 10:05, Roman Divacky wrote: > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 08:21:41AM +0200, Dominic Fandrey wrote: >> An interesting result is that buildkernel with clang takes longer: >> CC=clang >> time -l make buildkernel >> 921.31 real 802.25 user 114.93 sys >> time -l make buildkernel -j3 >> 645.17 real 838.46 user 143.03 sys >> >> CC=cc >> time -l make buildkernel >> 877.14 real 757.42 user 115.11 sys >> time -l make buildkernel -j3 >> 628.32 real 798.03 user 149.52 sys > > fwiw.. these are my times: > > > clang: > 403.342u 42.516s 6:53.30 107.8% 21957+2248k 33+56671io 364pf+0w > > gcc: > 451.952u 42.860s 7:23.16 111.6% 6564+2012k 78+43200io 3pf+0w > > > note that clang build had more page faults thus would be a little faster > without them Nice compile times, and thank you for destroying my illusions that my Core2Duo notebook performs quite decently. :( The difference is alarmingly huge. I wonder whether the memory disk actually hurts performance. I will have to test this. I normally use ccache, and am used to a lot faster buildkernels and buildworlds, but I turned this off for the performance tests. So this didn't alarm me until I saw your measurements. Regards -- A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?