Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 17:24:10 +0000 From: Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com> To: rank1seeker@gmail.com Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CPUTYPE and friends, from 'make.conf' benchmark Message-ID: <CADLo83-T7OoSGWCcC_Wv-XkUcD4Wkayh_VTtUSUWWSr1NHVh6Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20111206.170342.731.2@DOMY-PC> References: <20111205.171654.020.1@DOMY-PC> <CAGH67wTjGyhWAMYsCtzp8X7nN=yswOGntO=46AmT7yxymHSQ%2Bg@mail.gmail.com> <20111206.170342.731.2@DOMY-PC>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 6 Dec 2011 17:04, <rank1seeker@gmail.com> wrote: > > # /bin/sh -c "gcc -v -x c -E -mtune=native /dev/null -o /dev/null 2>&1 | grep mtune | sed -e 's/.*mtune=//'" > generic > > For target machine, it returned 'generic' > > Now only with CPUTYPE in 'make.conf': > -- > CPUTYPE?=core2 > -- > > > Also, you should set these in src.conf. Sticking them in make.conf is > > going to annoy people when you ask why your ports are breaking ;) > > > > Chris > > I want my ports, to also be optimized for target CPU, not just base. > None of my ports got broken yet. I was referring to the other stuff, but CPUTYPE is fine, yes. > Rebuilded can ... > > Tests are started AFTER a reboot! > There is no bgfsck, as per rc.conf: > -- > background_fsck=NO > fsck_y_enable=YES > fsck_y_flags=-C > -- > > Same multiuser enviroment > Test done once. > > After running: '# time unixbench', final score was: > 395.4 > Completed in 22.8 min > > Time is SAME as with generic binaries, but score is just a 1.2 higher, which is too small to be relevant. > What do you think about this? > I think this is why most people don't bother with setting CPUTYPE ;) Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADLo83-T7OoSGWCcC_Wv-XkUcD4Wkayh_VTtUSUWWSr1NHVh6Q>