From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Sun Aug 28 16:03:07 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ECEEB77A6D for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 16:03:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dieterich.joh@gmail.com) Received: from mail-oi0-x22f.google.com (mail-oi0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22E9B1B3; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 16:03:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dieterich.joh@gmail.com) Received: by mail-oi0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id j203so22238894oih.2; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 09:03:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=lwdEmFg79PxgCVN5wuTAFdIPp2oRu8SXH5kQn/2d4Iw=; b=q7N6pqoBvVRlQK65sj2mKgYRI+8bKCTelk0jZhJowp7Fr3pqbnFn06o6ABJkSefnzj ksWemAD8jU24K5Evv0tW9ThbrWXNqEHMe+S0j2TPkA+UTkwp2IDZ0ObEDEyDZJJO/os+ cPjxayH8aiuKvfjSPhrI/a4VRooWIX+clwWz6eFwvYH1RkKydV1EY2sikICFrXcNJus9 YBOBmgkbCpzLn6kEjVIO67yAEZZIf3rEBYc6N4QHF5VNT7YRbNZEQg7YPJ/NDJWYzmhN FFwndmomLtVJCjd28QujJVxPaYYakQRAC3BpLJFSVedCXA/BX+Zwv2E0hgnHaszpB933 DZJA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=lwdEmFg79PxgCVN5wuTAFdIPp2oRu8SXH5kQn/2d4Iw=; b=UTIt+SOOVqqsdY/xlI5CpaOxHq+yGqRJJaHPGq6wvFxSUEv6b/D6bZHoseydnuZaaU Lbf+BlBrw1mg+PGpsCO5gy1DIWUI9vPeNH/QpUpK3qA6g1V1YxBJM9i1vhEI6S6+Hht+ sVfxxEZxF+nyimlCk85T/NnQUa8jzC3ZFi/hWBCvhod1sFI4AuD5MlZPFQsOWQE8b4JT +SKiXEHwURS4UECPrGr/Wl9Ko098Pa5zkQ2vXDSozUiTpzzJOnn6JpChyDPrLD3Xph9V F5b9t2K0oUMyDmtOE7UeZMeShfoEiIGGrKLrYluoK85I1NTCKNgb0kA6hLJ0KOBqBkgs X2XQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwM3Rh5twtNBb4LgiFGIyctuDEjVLQGBP4rpBlvF0a7kpJ/n1ugsWCo8PkomB5XHWA/iP116ZnkCUHdW2Q== X-Received: by 10.157.46.20 with SMTP id q20mr1497944otb.52.1472400186408; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 09:03:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.202.60.133 with HTTP; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 09:03:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20160819073422.4292997b@X220.alogt.com> <20160821144505.27c0f55d@X220.alogt.com> <827183a944ee4052649c152d65204444@schema31.it> <20160822101423.GF18643@e-new.0x20.net> <79F32FFD-BBDF-4359-A4CB-C80A3FC59EAD@FreeBSD.org> From: Johannes Dieterich Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 12:03:05 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Benchmarks results for FreeBSD 11 To: =?UTF-8?Q?Fernando_Herrero_Carr=C3=B3n?= Cc: Dimitry Andric , "K. Macy" , freebsd-stable , Lars Engels , Erich Dollansky , Andrea Brancatelli , Kubilay Kocak Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 16:03:07 -0000 On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 11:16 AM, Fernando Herrero Carr=C3=B3n wrote: > El 28/8/2016 14:56, "Dimitry Andric" escribi=C3=B3: >> >> On 28 Aug 2016, at 02:10, K. Macy wrote: >> > >> >> The problem here is that Phoronix took a Beta version of FreeBSD 11. >> >> Beta versions have a lot of debugging (malloc, invariants, witness) >> >> options enabled which make it significantly slower than release >> >> versions. This is even obviously when you run a Beta as a desktop. It >> >> just feels much slower. >> > >> > >> > I don't know what was going on in these particular tests, but in a >> > more recent benchmarking run >> > >> > -https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=3Darticle&item=3Dfreebsd11-cla= ng-gcc&num=3D1 >> > - you're seeing the result of openmp being disabled in base. The clang >> > maintainer for src refuses to include libomp as required for -fopenmp >> > because nothing in base requires it. >> >> Come on, this is nonsense. I have indicated earlier that I would have >> liked to import openmp into base, but this was shot down precisely for >> that reason: nothing in base uses it. >> >> So for now, the solution is simply: install one of the llvm ports, and >> use it. These have configuration setting to install every optional >> component from the LLVM project. >> >> -Dimitry >> > > How does the port infrastructure handle openmp-enabled ports (those with = an > openmp option) then? Is an omp-capable compiler automatically pulled in o= r > is openmp ignored unless the port explicitely requests one from ports? If you set compiler:openmp, it currently defaults to pull in lang/gcc. So, even if the port would be perfectly happy to compile with llvm, we rely on gcc. If the port is an important library such as openblas or fftw3, this then in turn causes all the well documented issues for software using that library. So we should rely on, at the very least, lang/llvm38 to be used for these cases. However, that does not work out of the box as those ports do not find their own libraries (libomp is the important one here) by themselves, requiring alterations to every single make system (as the rest of the world correctly assumes that -fopenmp enables OpenMP) to add the link path. If that vaguely reminds you of the -Wl,-rpath=3D/usr/local/lib/gcc48 insanity, you'd be right. All of this may be why important ports (openblas, fftw3, ImageMagick) do not enable OpenMP by default, leaving us with sub-par performance not only in benchmarks such as the one cited above. It is a dreadful situation in my opinion and is not helped by the fact that we do not even acknowledge there to be an issue. I happen to require working OpenMP support on a day-to-day basis, are required to jump through hoops to get it, and it seems decisions are made without assessing the impact of them for people like me. Sorry Johannes