Блог пользователя MaxBuzz

GCC: deoptimize using -O2
Автор MaxBuzz, 14 лет назад, По-английски
The following code produces strange results while compiling it under GCC with different optimization levels:
  • gcc source.cpp -> 0.440 s
  • gcc -O2 source.cpp -> 2.750 s (-O, -O1, -O2 the same)
  • gcc -Os source.cpp -> 0.223 s
For N=500, it is as follows:
  • gcc source.cpp -> 3.931 s
  • gcc -Os source.cpp -> 2.704 s
  • gcc -O2 source.cpp -> 42.142 s
The setup is GCC 4.4.4 on 64-bit Gentoo Linux.

Somehow optimizations by speed significantly slow the code, while optimizations by size speed it up :-)

Could anybody compile and test the code on your machines? Or, possibly, explain why it is like this?
  • Проголосовать: нравится
  • +10
  • Проголосовать: не нравится

14 лет назад, # |
← Rev. 2   Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится
GCC 3.4.2 Windows 7 x64

N = 200

  • gcc source.cpp -> 6.38 s
  • gcc -O2 source.cpp -> 5.29 s
  • gcc -Os source.cpp -> 1.09 s

N = 500

  • gcc source.cpp -> 86.21 s
  • gcc -O2 source.cpp -> 79.34 s
  • gcc -Os source.cpp -> 13.51 s

→ Ответить
14 лет назад, # |
  Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится
My results are as expected:

  • gcc source.cpp -> 0.545s
  • gcc -O2 source.cpp -> 0.421s
  • gcc -Os source.cpp -> 0.466s
For N=500, it is as follows:
  • gcc source.cpp -> 5.758s
  • gcc -Os source.cpp ->5.138s
  • gcc -O2 source.cpp -> 4.949s

gcc version 4.2.1 (Apple Inc. build 5666) (dot 3)
Target platform appears to be "x86_64", but the CPU itself is 32-bit.
→ Ответить
14 лет назад, # |
  Проголосовать: нравится +8 Проголосовать: не нравится
Here are my results for N=200. (gcc 4.4.3, Ubuntu 32bit).

g++  0.899s
g++ -O2 4.733s
g++ -Os 0.413s
g++ -O2 -fno-tree-ter 0.390s

One would think that the optimization ftree-ter is broken. However it seems that it's enabled at -Os as well. In fact, the only difference in optimizations between -O2 and -Os is -finline-functions at my system. I tried turning it on, but to no effect.

Here's the relevant part of the man page:
-ftree-ter 
Perform temporary expression replacement during the SSA->normal phase.  Single
use/single def temporaries are replaced at their use location with their
defining expression.  This results in non-GIMPLE code, but gives the expanders
much more complex trees to work on resulting in better RTL generation.  This is
enabled by default at -O and higher.
→ Ответить
14 лет назад, # |
← Rev. 3   Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится
In reply to adamax.

Probably, this is the key. Seems to be that this results in copying of strings before comparison. As you can see, the slowdown of plain -O2 seems to be not constant, but asymptotical. I will check this when I reach home.

[Update] I was telling nonsense about asymptotics.
→ Ответить
  • 14 лет назад, # ^ |
    ← Rev. 2   Проголосовать: нравится +5 Проголосовать: не нравится
    I disassembled the code of string::operator==. Turns out that in case of -O2 it uses the assembler instruction repz cmpsb, while in other cases it calls the system function memcmp. I found the description of this issue here. Quote:
    "in the -O0 case, GCC relies on the implementation
    of memcmp supplied with the C library. In the -O2 case, GCC instead uses its built-in implementation of memcmp. The built-in function uses the special IA-32 instruction repz cmpsb, which is known to be slow on modern hardware."
    Apparently switching off builtins (-fno-builtin) should fix the issue as well.

    And Bugzilla link.
    → Ответить