From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 6 00:00:36 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1686F106566B for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 00:00:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from out-0.mx.aerioconnect.net (out-0-37.mx.aerioconnect.net [216.240.47.97]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B54AB8FC0A for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 00:00:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from idiom.com (postfix@mx0.idiom.com [216.240.32.160]) by out-0.mx.aerioconnect.net (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oB600YI8008669; Sun, 5 Dec 2010 16:00:34 -0800 X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e Received: from julian-mac.elischer.org (h-67-100-89-137.snfccasy.static.covad.net [67.100.89.137]) by idiom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B59AA2D6015; Sun, 5 Dec 2010 16:00:33 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4CFC27A0.8000406@freebsd.org> Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2010 16:00:32 -0800 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10.4; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steve Kargl References: <20101205231829.GA68156@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <20101205231829.GA68156@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 216.240.47.51 Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Process accounting/timing has broken recently X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 00:00:36 -0000 On 12/5/10 3:18 PM, Steve Kargl wrote: > Sometime in the last 7-10 days, some one made a > change that has broken process accounting/timing. > > laptop:kargl[42] foreach i ( 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ) > foreach? time ./testf > foreach? end > Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 > 69.55 real 38.39 user 30.94 sys > Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 > 68.82 real 40.95 user 27.60 sys > Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 > 69.14 real 38.90 user 30.02 sys > Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 > 68.79 real 40.59 user 27.99 sys > Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 > 68.93 real 39.76 user 28.96 sys > Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 > 68.71 real 41.21 user 27.29 sys > Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 > 69.05 real 39.68 user 29.15 sys > Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 > 68.99 real 39.98 user 28.80 sys > Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 > 69.02 real 39.64 user 29.16 sys > Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 > 69.38 real 37.49 user 31.67 sys > > testf is a numerically intensive program that tests the > accuracy of expf() in a tight loop. User time varies > by ~3 seconds on my lightly loaded 2 GHz core2 duo processor. > I'm fairly certain that the code does not suddenly grow/loose > 6 GFLOP of operations. > I know it's a lot to ask but it may be something that you can help with if you had the time to triangulate in on the change that did it.. I presume that since you are an "old hand" you can check out sources at different revisions..