A Compiler Comparison in the RISC-V Ecosystem

Mehrdad Poorhosseini, W. Nebel, Kim Grüttner
{"title":"A Compiler Comparison in the RISC-V Ecosystem","authors":"Mehrdad Poorhosseini, W. Nebel, Kim Grüttner","doi":"10.1109/COINS49042.2020.9191411","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The GNU Compiler Collection (GCC) is the traditional compiler for most embedded systems, since it supports many different instruction set architectures (ISA) in its back-end. GCC has also been the first compiler that supported the RISC-V ISA. Since a while Clang/LLVM has gained more and more interest in the embedded software community. Recently, RISC-V is also supported in the LLVM back-end and maintained in the official LLVM release. In this paper we propose a benchmark environment for the comparison of compilers in the RISC-V ecosystem. We perform a comparison of GCC against LLVM for an embedded software benchmark considering compile time, size of the resulting binary, number of instructions and execution time. The results show that LLVM compiles faster in 88% of the experiments, while GCC and LLVM produce nearly the same binary size in 51% of the experiments. In 37% GCC wins and in 12% LLVM wins. In 94% of the experiments the difference between the resulting binary size in GCC and LLVM is +/-5%. The execution time analysis shows that in 42% of the experiments GCC and LLVM have nearly the same execution time clock cycles while in 40% GCC wins and in 18% LLVM wins.","PeriodicalId":350108,"journal":{"name":"2020 International Conference on Omni-layer Intelligent Systems (COINS)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2020 International Conference on Omni-layer Intelligent Systems (COINS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/COINS49042.2020.9191411","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

The GNU Compiler Collection (GCC) is the traditional compiler for most embedded systems, since it supports many different instruction set architectures (ISA) in its back-end. GCC has also been the first compiler that supported the RISC-V ISA. Since a while Clang/LLVM has gained more and more interest in the embedded software community. Recently, RISC-V is also supported in the LLVM back-end and maintained in the official LLVM release. In this paper we propose a benchmark environment for the comparison of compilers in the RISC-V ecosystem. We perform a comparison of GCC against LLVM for an embedded software benchmark considering compile time, size of the resulting binary, number of instructions and execution time. The results show that LLVM compiles faster in 88% of the experiments, while GCC and LLVM produce nearly the same binary size in 51% of the experiments. In 37% GCC wins and in 12% LLVM wins. In 94% of the experiments the difference between the resulting binary size in GCC and LLVM is +/-5%. The execution time analysis shows that in 42% of the experiments GCC and LLVM have nearly the same execution time clock cycles while in 40% GCC wins and in 18% LLVM wins.
RISC-V生态系统中的编译器比较
GNU编译器集合(GCC)是大多数嵌入式系统的传统编译器,因为它在后端支持许多不同的指令集体系结构(ISA)。GCC也是第一个支持RISC-V ISA的编译器。一段时间以来,Clang/LLVM在嵌入式软件社区引起了越来越多的兴趣。最近,在LLVM的后端也支持RISC-V,并在LLVM的官方版本中进行维护。在本文中,我们提出了一个用于比较RISC-V生态系统中编译器的基准环境。考虑编译时间、生成的二进制文件的大小、指令数和执行时间,我们对GCC和LLVM进行了嵌入式软件基准测试的比较。结果表明,LLVM在88%的实验中编译速度更快,而GCC和LLVM在51%的实验中生成的二进制大小几乎相同。37%的GCC胜出,12%的LLVM胜出。在94%的实验中,GCC和LLVM生成的二进制大小的差异为+/-5%。执行时间分析表明,在42%的实验中,GCC和LLVM具有几乎相同的执行时间时钟周期,而40%的实验中GCC胜出,18%的实验中LLVM胜出。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信