From: Benjamin King <benjaminking@web.de>
To: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Failure to parallelize
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 15:55:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160817135528.GA13652@localhost> (raw)
Hi,
I recently had a performance regression where the program mysteriously became
20% slower without executing more instructions or burning more cycles. It
turned out that a loop lost an openmp pragma and wasn't parallel afterwards.
This was a tiny part of a larger diff and missed during code review.
I was struggeling to find this with perf. "perf record" did show me mostly
identical values. "perf stat" also was mostly the same, including "task-clock
(msec)".
Eventually, I had noticed the lower number for "CPUs utilized", but I had no
idea, where in my code this would be.
In the following sample code, I am always getting ~10% reported by perf for
the function bar(), regardless of whether I am calling it in parallel or not.
Is there some way to make the difference more visible in perf?
Cheers,
Benjamin King
----- 8< -----
// gcc -g -fopenmp noppy.c -o noppy; perf record ./noppy; perf report
#include <omp.h>
#include <stdio.h>
void foo() // ~90% of "work" is done here
{
int i;
for ( i = 0; i < 900; ++i )
asm("nop;nop;nop;nop;");
}
void bar() // ~10% of "work" is done here
{
int i;
for ( i = 0; i < 100; ++i )
asm("nop;nop;nop;nop;");
}
int main()
{
int s;
for ( s = 0; s < 1; ++s )
{
long i;
#pragma omp parallel for
for ( i = 0; i < 1000000; ++i )
foo();
// Whoops, I accidently deleted the following pragma
//#pragma omp parallel for
for ( i = 0; i < 1000000; ++i )
bar();
}
}
----- 8< -----
next reply other threads:[~2016-08-17 13:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-17 13:55 Benjamin King [this message]
2016-08-18 9:56 ` Failure to parallelize Milian Wolff
2016-08-18 18:50 ` Benjamin King
2016-08-22 21:14 ` Andi Kleen
2016-08-23 6:10 ` Benjamin King
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=20160817135528.GA13652@localhost \
--to=benjaminking@web.de \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).