From: Patrice Bouchand <pb_fwd_list@yahoo.fr>
To: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
Subject: mcpu options for AMCC440 with fpu
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 09:45:04 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <600461.55072.qm@web23412.mail.ird.yahoo.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2382 bytes --]
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.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3259 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2007-02-19 8:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-02-19 8:45 Patrice Bouchand [this message]
2007-02-21 19:47 ` mcpu options for AMCC440 with fpu Patrice Bouchand
2007-02-21 21:35 ` Magnus Hjorth
2007-02-22 6:57 ` RE : " Patrice Bouchand
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=600461.55072.qm@web23412.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.