[Bug ld/30724] Massive ld performance regression in binutils-2.41 since 014a602b86f08de96fc80ef3f96a87db6cccad56
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30724 --- Comment #3 from Achim --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > That would be then a bug in cygwin stdio code I suspect ... Maybe, or maybe it actually has to be that way since the wording in POSIX seems to imply that when certain open modes are in effect, then an fseek requires flushing or the equivalent thereof (when the mode changes, which Cygwin may not be able to detect reliably, so it may have to assume the mode will change). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/30724] Massive ld performance regression in binutils-2.41 since 014a602b86f08de96fc80ef3f96a87db6cccad56
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30724 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Achim from comment #1) > AFter a few false starts since it seems one really needs to freshly > configure and compile the whole thing each time this got bisected to: > > https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commitdiff; > h=014a602b86f08de96fc80ef3f96a87db6cccad56 > > Why and how this produces the effect I've reported is a massive > head-scratcher, but I've confirmed that with this patch reverted 2.41 does > not only link as fast as 2.40 again, it is actually faster: > > 2.41re: 10.494u 1.370s 0:17.01 69.7% 0+0k 0+0io 1904230pf+0w That would be then a bug in cygwin stdio code I suspect ... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/30724] Massive ld performance regression in binutils-2.41 since 014a602b86f08de96fc80ef3f96a87db6cccad56
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30724 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|massive ld performance |Massive ld performance |regression |regression in binutils-2.41 ||since ||014a602b86f08de96fc80ef3f96 ||a87db6cccad56 CC||amodra at gmail dot com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/30724] massive ld performance regression
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30724 --- Comment #1 from Achim --- AFter a few false starts since it seems one really needs to freshly configure and compile the whole thing each time this got bisected to: https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commitdiff;h=014a602b86f08de96fc80ef3f96a87db6cccad56 Why and how this produces the effect I've reported is a massive head-scratcher, but I've confirmed that with this patch reverted 2.41 does not only link as fast as 2.40 again, it is actually faster: 2.41re: 10.494u 1.370s 0:17.01 69.7% 0+0k 0+0io 1904230pf+0w -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/30724] massive ld performance regression
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30724 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target||cygwin CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org Severity|critical|normal -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/30724] massive ld performance regression
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30724 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sam at gentoo dot org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug binutils/30725] severe objdump performance regression
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30725 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sam at gentoo dot org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug binutils/30725] severe objdump performance regression
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30725 Hannes Domani changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ssbssa at sourceware dot org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/30724] massive ld performance regression
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30724 Hannes Domani changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ssbssa at sourceware dot org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug binutils/30725] New: severe objdump performance regression
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30725 Bug ID: 30725 Summary: severe objdump performance regression Product: binutils Version: 2.41 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: binutils Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: Stromeko at nexgo dot de Target Milestone: --- On Cygwin the performance of objdump has further degraded with 2.41. The extraction of the debuginfo source files from the objects with "objdump -d -l" that was already quite slow sees an additional 2× slowdown cs. the previous version. * cygport gcc install 2.39: 8763.607u 284.933s 29:14.38 515.7% 0+0k 0+0io 41005478pf+0w 2.40: 10122.687u 249.745s 31:29.71 548.8% 0+0k 0+0io 41382419pf+0w 2.41: 23065.196u 516.525s 1:02:40.22 627.1% 0+0k 0+0io 41348709pf+0w The timing of install phase of gcc is dominated by the objdump invocation and there mainly by the compiler executables (d21 usually takes the longest). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/30724] New: massive ld performance regression
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30724 Bug ID: 30724 Summary: massive ld performance regression Product: binutils Version: 2.41 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical Priority: P2 Component: ld Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: Stromeko at nexgo dot de Target Milestone: --- On Cygwin there is a massive performance regression during the link phase with version 2.41. The degradation is superlinear in the number of objects involved and I have observed link operations that take more than 30× longer than with the previous version. One of the changes suspected was 38395c77, but that doesn't seem to be the main contributor to the regression (at least not in isolation). * cygport protobuf-21.12 compile 2.39: 1420.820u 143.747s 3:20.37 780.8% 0+0k 0+0io 41531073pf+0w 2.40: 1429.088u 140.548s 3:18.48 790.8% 0+0k 0+0io 41615637pf+0w 2.41: 1496.555u 524.457s 10:07.31 332.7% 0+0k 0+0io 41570112pf+0w * only the linking of protobuf-21.12 2.39: 14.212u 2.614s 0:20.54 81.8% 0+0k 0+0io 1909884pf+0w 2.40: 13.371u 0.839s 0:20.46 69.4% 0+0k 0+0io 1910885pf+0w 2.41: 85.507u 373.960s 7:55.39 96.6% 0+0k 0+0io 1905021pf+0w 38395c77/pdb.c w/o call to qsort 84.933u 363.715s 7:37.01 98.1% 0+0k 0+0io 1906464pf+0w 38395c77/pdb.c full revert 82.964u 361.461s 7:30.39 98.6% 0+0k 0+0io 1906266pf+0w -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
