From: Patrice Bouchand <pb_fwd_list@yahoo.fr>
To: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
Subject: RE : Re: mcpu options for AMCC440 with fpu
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 07:57:59 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <447407.61964.qm@web23402.mail.ird.yahoo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070221223543.64d584d7.mh@omnisys.se>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4411 bytes --]
Thanks for your answer but unfortunately, it makes just the thing a bit slower:
-bash-3.00# gcc -O2 -mcpu=440fp -ffast-math ./mandelbrot.c -o ./mandelbrot && time ./mandelbrot && rm -f ./mandelbrot
real 1m17.901s
user 1m17.828s
sys 0m0.036s
-bash-3.00# gcc -O2 -mcpu=440 -ffast-math ./mandelbrot.c -o ./mandelbrot && time ./mandelbrot && rm -f ./mandelbrot
real 0m41.180s
user 0m41.116s
sys 0m0.040s
-bash-3.00# gcc -O2 -mcpu=G3 -ffast-math ./mandelbrot.c -o ./mandelbrot && time ./mandelbrot && rm -f ./mandelbrot
real 1m14.820s
user 1m14.760s
sys 0m0.044s
Magnus Hjorth <mh@omnisys.se> a écrit : Hi,
Have you tried using the -ffast-math option?
/Magnus
On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 20:47:50 +0100
Patrice Bouchand
wrote:
>
> FYI, I got the following answer on mplayer mailing list:
>
> > Apparently -mcpu=440fp is the one. However, it's possible, that GCC
> > "optimizations" actually make the code slower.
>
> Can someone confirme this possiblity ?
>
> Any answer would be greatly appreciated ;)
>
>
> Patrice Bouchand
>
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I was searching for the best mcpu option for amcc440, compiling and
> > running a small program you can find here:
> > http://magnux.free.fr/gcc/mandelbrot.c. My distro is a ppc fedora core
> > 6, and results are obviously the same using DENX4.0.
> >
> > --------------------
> > -bash-3.00# gcc -O2 ./mandelbrot.c -o ./mandelbrot &&
> > time ./mandelbrot && rm -f ./mandelbrot
> >
> > real 1m15.059s
> > user 1m14.996s
> > sys 0m0.060s
> > -bash-3.00# gcc -O2 -mcpu=440 ./mandelbrot.c -o ./mandelbrot &&
> > time ./mandelbrot && rm -f ./mandelbrot
> >
> > real 0m39.606s
> > user 0m39.552s
> > sys 0m0.028s
> > -bash-3.00# gcc -O2 -mcpu=440fp ./mandelbrot.c -o ./mandelbrot &&
> > time ./mandelbrot && rm -f ./mandelbrot
> >
> > real 1m15.016s
> > user 1m14.988s
> > sys 0m0.024s
> > -bash-3.00# gcc -O2 -msoft-float ./mandelbrot.c -o ./mandelbrot &&
> > time ./mandelbrot && rm -f ./mandelbrot
> >
> > real 0m39.577s
> > user 0m39.544s
> > sys 0m0.032s
> > --------------------
> >
> > * I do not explain why not using FPU gives better results ?
> >
> > * I did also a test with bzip2.c
> > ( http://pag.csail.mit.edu/~smcc/projects/single-file-programs/bzip2.c ).
> >
> > ----------------------
> > -bash-3.00# gcc -O2 ./bzip2.c -o ./bzip2 && time ./bzip2 ./oggenc.c
> > && ./bzip2 -d ./oggenc.c.bz2 && rm ./bzip2
> >
> > real 0m18.478s
> > user 0m18.216s
> > sys 0m0.152s
> > -bash-3.00# gcc -O2 -mcpu=440 ./bzip2.c -o ./bzip2 &&
> > time ./bzip2 ./oggenc.c && ./bzip2 -d ./oggenc.c.bz2 && rm ./bzip2
> >
> > real 0m18.786s
> > user 0m18.544s
> > sys 0m0.128s
> > -bash-3.00# gcc -O2 -mcpu=440fp ./bzip2.c -o ./bzip2 &&
> > time ./bzip2 ./oggenc.c && ./bzip2 -d ./oggenc.c.bz2 && rm ./bzip2
> >
> > real 0m18.811s
> > user 0m18.548s
> > sys 0m0.144s
> > -bash-3.00# gcc -O2 -mcpu=G3 ./bzip2.c -o ./bzip2 &&
> > time ./bzip2 ./oggenc.c && ./bzip2 -d ./oggenc.c.bz2 && rm ./bzip2
> >
> > real 0m18.871s
> > user 0m18.644s
> > sys 0m0.104s
> > ----------------------
> >
> > * mcpu option seems to not have any effect ?
> >
> > * My third test was to compile and run mplayer.
> > - With default options (no mcpu specified), my test mpeg was smooth.
> > - With mcpu=440fp, my test mpeg was not smooth.
> >
> > Can anybody bring me some lights about the right gcc mcpu option for
> > amcc440 ?
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Patrice Bouchand
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > Découvrez une nouvelle façon d'obtenir des réponses à toutes vos
> > questions ! Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des
> > expériences des internautes sur Yahoo! Questions/Réponses.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
> > Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
> > https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
> Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
> https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
---------------------------------
Découvrez une nouvelle façon d'obtenir des réponses à toutes vos questions ! Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des expériences des internautes sur Yahoo! Questions/Réponses.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6054 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-22 6:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-02-19 8:45 mcpu options for AMCC440 with fpu Patrice Bouchand
2007-02-21 19:47 ` Patrice Bouchand
2007-02-21 21:35 ` Magnus Hjorth
2007-02-22 6:57 ` Patrice Bouchand [this message]
2007-02-23 22:58 ` Wolfgang Denk
2007-02-24 6:44 ` Patrice Bouchand
2007-02-24 20:20 ` Wolfgang Denk
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=447407.61964.qm@web23402.mail.ird.yahoo.com \
--to=pb_fwd_list@yahoo.fr \
--cc=linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.