From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39804)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dl.soluz@gmx.net>) id 1ZSpNh-0000uG-3j
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 Aug 2015 12:41:29 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dl.soluz@gmx.net>) id 1ZSpNc-0004HC-0Z
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 Aug 2015 12:41:29 -0400
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]:53202)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dl.soluz@gmx.net>) id 1ZSpNb-0004Gv-Mm
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 Aug 2015 12:41:23 -0400
References: <55B9DD60.8020801@gmx.net> <20150730085500.GV11361@aurel32.net>
	<20150730155003.GE30591@aurel32.net>
	<CACXAS8ABo2yCVL9Hk9yoyY1wvF4X1Oq4vFs87gQyRjH59Yi1Lg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20150731154323.GD23508@aurel32.net>
	<CACXAS8CLVt_0rQCLWmYp=YhL1PJyVLGAxyvQB27Cm6rM+MTGWg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20150803091716.GF30591@aurel32.net>
	<CACXAS8Dv410OJn4tQ14hLOsR-TjHCMQXmTMU8Dk_XT1saPQz9g@mail.gmail.com>
	<55D37189.3010809@twiddle.net>
	<CACXAS8CcN9bz8GBtKyoK+FH29qpRm1XeiGf7apYTBfWYV4evKw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20150819110010.GJ23508@aurel32.net>
	<CACXAS8C82pZws_LYanyEa4YVZdkk717imyRcmCNfvv3uDivr0Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<55D60C1B.9010502@twiddle.net> <55D6A9DF.5070506@gmx.net>
	<55D6BC00.50200@twiddle.net> <55D6BFAD.4080501@gmx.net>
	<55D74828.6050209@twiddle.net>
From: Dennis Luehring <dl.soluz@gmx.net>
Message-ID: <55D754A5.8080409@gmx.net>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 18:41:09 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <55D74828.6050209@twiddle.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Debian 7.8.0 SPARC64 on qemu - anything i can do
 to speedup the emulation?
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>, Artyom Tarasenko <atar4qemu@gmail.com>, Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>
Cc: qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

Am 21.08.2015 um 17:47 schrieb Richard Henderson:
> On 08/20/2015 11:05 PM, Dennis Luehring wrote:
> >> > g++ src/pugixml.cpp -g -Wall -Wextra -Werror -pedantic -std=c++0x -c -MMD -MP
> >> >
> >> > tcg-indirect: ~2:46.5
> >> > qemu.org-git: ~2:51.2 (worst result)
> >> > without-optimization: ~2:14.1 (best result)
> >>
> >> No compiler optimization?  I wouldn't expect there to be much for tcg to
> >> optimize there -- dropping values to memory all the time doesn't leave much.
> >
> >
> > without-optimization means qemu.org-git release build + undefine
> > USE_TCG_OPTIMIZATIONS in tcg/tcg.c
> > or what compiler do you mean?
>
> The one for compiling the benchmark: g++ -O2.


for the overall speed comparision it  is not relevant if its -O0, -O2 or -O3
as long as all my test using always the same optimization

>
> >> These results are weird.  Unoptimized less than half the speed of mainline?
> >> Improving optimization (with no extra work, mind) brings the results back down?
> >
> >
> > yep they are - it seems that the assumption of the involved developers
> > where speed can be improved / or slowbess comes from is not correct
> > how are SPARC64 benchmarks done usually?
>
> *shrug* No different than any other..

so what benchmarks are in use?
are there any download/compile/installable around
some sort of default qemu performance tests?

> .
>
>
> r~
>