On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 09:28:56AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 06/17/2011 08:20 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> >On Jun 17, 2011, at 10:47 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> >>I've done a lot of g++-only testsuite runs lately
> >
> >I think it is reasonable to have even more of them, say, if you have 16
> >co
On Jun 20, 2011, at 4:06 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
> I've got a patch to do this, prompted by the use of UltraSPARC-T2
> machines with 8 cores/8 strands which are quite slow on their own:
>
> [build, testsuite, v3] Increase gcc, g++, gfortran and libstdc++-v3
> testsuite parallelism
>h
On 06/17/2011 08:20 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
On Jun 17, 2011, at 10:47 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
I've done a lot of g++-only testsuite runs lately
I think it is reasonable to have even more of them, say, if you have 16 cores
and just test c++... I wonder what the scaling is like as we approach la
Mike Stump writes:
> On Jun 17, 2011, at 10:47 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
>> I've done a lot of g++-only testsuite runs lately
>
> I think it is reasonable to have even more of them, say, if you have
> 16 cores and just test c++... I wonder what the scaling is like as we
> approach larger N. :-)
On Jun 17, 2011, at 10:47 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> I've done a lot of g++-only testsuite runs lately
I think it is reasonable to have even more of them, say, if you have 16 cores
and just test c++... I wonder what the scaling is like as we approach larger
N. :-)
OK.
Jason
I've done a lot of g++-only testsuite runs lately and I noticed that it
didn't parallelize all that well. The patch below adds a couple more
.exp files to the parallel infrastructure. dg-torture.exp is the big
one; it takes about as much time as old-deja.exp.
Other valid candidates are lto.exp a
