# Struggling with a strange performance issue **URL:** \ **Category:** Help\ **Created:** [May 4, 2022, 7:30am UTC](https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/struggling-with-a-strange-performance-issue/3372 "2022-05-04T07:30:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 13
**Author:** ![MatthewMacGregor](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/fortran-lang.discourse.group/matthewmacgregor/32/1622_2.png) [@MatthewMacGregor](https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/u/MatthewMacGregor)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2022, 4:18pm UTC](https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/struggling-with-a-strange-performance-issue/3372/13 "2022-05-08T16:18:44Z")
It’s a rainy Sunday morning here and I enjoy a good perf investigation, so I pulled together a minimal reproducible example of nothing but the `get_pointer` and `get_pointer_dummy` subs. The internals of both are identical, and the loops that exercise them are identical. This allowed me to isolate and exercise the assertion that execution times are substantially longer with the four param signature (view) than the three param signature. My work is here: [GitHub - matthew-macgregor/fort-lang-disc-3372: Testing a hunch related to a thread in the Fortran Discourse group.](https://github.com/matthew-macgregor/fort-lang-disc-3372) The example is set up to build and run with `fpm` to make it especially easy to clone and run if anyone is curious to try it out. - Compiler: `gfortran 11.2.0 (mingw, build from source from the nuwen distribution)` - OS: Windows 10 Pro I found a measurable difference at 100M iterations between the `get_pointer_dummy` and `get_pointer` subroutines when run in isolation with an _unoptimized_ build, but nothing like what @Arjen noted. Optimized with `-O3` I found no difference between the two variants. This seems to track with what @mecej4 posted. I also explored the generated assembly for any clues. In the unoptimized case, the compiler generated 7 extra instructions for the loop and `get_pointer` than it did for the loop and `get_pointer_dummy`. As expected, `get_pointer_dummy` was ~ 12% faster than `get_pointer`, despite the fact that the subs themselves are doing the same thing (essentially nothing). I believe the additional instructions account for this difference for the slower case. Meanwhile, the optimized code (`-O3`) had identical performance at 100M iterations and `get_pointer` generated only two additional loc to set up the extra argument to the subroutine call. You can see all of this in the `asm/` folder in the repo I posted if you’re curious, and there are instructions in the `README.md` if you want to try to reproduce it. With enough iterations, I’m sure that the difference would become measurable (those two instructions to pass the extra param will add up), but certainly seems to rule out anything unexpected related to the subroutine call itself. ```auto # Unoptimized :: testing get_pointer Wall clock (s): 0.656000 CPU time (s): 0.656250 :: testing get_pointer_dummy Wall clock (s): 0.578000 CPU time (s): 0.578125 ``` ```auto # Optimized with -O3 :: testing get_pointer Wall clock (s): 0.281000 CPU time (s): 0.281250 :: testing get_pointer_dummy Wall clock (s): 0.281000 CPU time (s): 0.281250 ``` ### Caveats - I’m not a Fortran programmer. - This is my first post on Discourse, so I’m still in the zero trust tier, which limits my ability to link/attach. --- _[View the full topic](https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/struggling-with-a-strange-performance-issue/3372)._