Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:06:27 -0500 From: "Juan Tumani" <jtumani55@hotmail.com> To: wes@softweyr.com Cc: des@des.no Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.2 v/s FreeBSD 4.9 MFLOPS performance (gcc3.3.3 v/sgcc2.9.5) Message-ID: <BAY12-F7400dSdVudU50002fbf0@hotmail.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Wes, How many mflops do you get if on your 5.2 machine you run a flops that was compiled -static on 4.9 ? My tests show the speed more than doubles. Thanks- JT >From: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> >To: des@des.no (Dag-Erling Smørgrav),Alexandr Kovalenko ><never@nevermind.kiev.ua> >CC: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Juan Tumani <jtumani55@hotmail.com> >Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.2 v/s FreeBSD 4.9 MFLOPS performance (gcc3.3.3 >v/sgcc2.9.5) >Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 03:52:16 -0800 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from mx2.freebsd.org ([216.136.204.119]) by mc9-f9.hotmail.com >with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Sun, 15 Feb 2004 19:52:44 -0800 >Received: from hub.freebsd.org (hub.freebsd.org [216.136.204.18])by >mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPid B8559565B0; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 >19:51:57 -0800 (PST)(envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org) >Received: from hub.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])by hub.freebsd.org >(Postfix) with ESMTPid 6CDEE16A50C; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 19:51:53 -0800 (PST) >Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])by >hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B429316A4CEfor ><freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>;Sun, 15 Feb 2004 19:51:30 -0800 (PST) >Received: from smtp.omnis.com (smtp.omnis.com [216.239.128.26])by >mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAF9243D1Dfor ><freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>;Sun, 15 Feb 2004 19:51:30 -0800 >(PST)(envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) >Received: from 204.68.178.129 (66-91-236-204.san.rr.com [66.91.236.204])by >smtp-relay.omnis.com (Postfix) with ESMTPid 463A78836A3; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 >19:51:26 -0800 (PST) >X-Message-Info: EoYTbT2lH2OyKE31GpCEKyiRPPOIBbCy >Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org >User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 >References: ><BAY12-F37zmBUw7MurD00010899@hotmail.com><20040214082420.GB77411@nevermind.kiev.ua> ><xzpvfm8yssm.fsf@dwp.des.no> >In-Reply-To: <xzpvfm8yssm.fsf@dwp.des.no> >Message-Id: <200402160352.16477.wes@softweyr.com> >X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org >X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 >Precedence: list >List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to >FreeBSD<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org> >List-Unsubscribe: ><http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>; >List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>; >List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> >List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help> >List-Subscribe: ><http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>; >Errors-To: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org >Return-Path: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Feb 2004 03:52:45.0036 (UTC) >FILETIME=[55C1E2C0:01C3F440] > >On Sunday 15 February 2004 12:46, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > > Alexandr Kovalenko <never@nevermind.kiev.ua> writes: > > > Could you please explain me this? Result is fully reproduceable. >Please > > > note, that the only difference is the output file name. Even resulting > > > files match bit-to-bit. [...] > > > > Definitely some kind of alignment problem, but it only shows up at > > some optimization levels and not others. > >I've tested the patch Dan mentioned before and the results were >astonishing. >Running the flops.c 1.2 program in a loop, lengthening the environment >string >by one byte each time, I get 8 successive runs of fast, then 8 successive >runs of slow, where fast and slow vary between 650 and 990 mflops. With >the >patch, the performance is always 990, within a few percent. > >Should I commit this? > >RCS file: /big/ncvs/src/sys/kern/kern_exec.c,v >retrieving revision 1.235 >diff -u -w -r1.235 kern_exec.c >--- kern_exec.c 28 Dec 2003 04:37:59 -0000 1.235 >+++ kern_exec.c 11 Feb 2004 16:47:28 -0000 >@@ -1014,6 +1014,15 @@ > */ > vectp = (char **)(destp - (imgp->argc + imgp->envc + 2) * > sizeof(char *)); >+ >+ /* >+ * Align stack to a multiple of 0x20. >+ * XXX vectp has the wrong type; we usually want a vm_offset_t; >+ * the suword() family takes a void *, but should take a >vm_offset_t. >+ * XXX should align stack for signals too. >+ * XXX should do this more machine/compiler-independently. >+ */ >+ vectp = (char **)(((vm_offset_t)vectp & ~(vm_offset_t)0x1F) - 4); > > /* > * vectp also becomes our initial stack base > > >-- > "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" > >Wes Peters Softweyr LLC >wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ > >_______________________________________________ >freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" _________________________________________________________________ Let the advanced features & services of MSN Internet Software maximize your online time. http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200363ave/direct/01/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BAY12-F7400dSdVudU50002fbf0>