On 3/22/07, Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/22/07, Doug Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The results, compile time:
For what test case?
All the numbers I've reported are for tramp3d, compiled with -O2
-funroll-loops -ffast-math on i686-pc-linux-gnu.
Did the 9-bit tree code include Alexandre Oliva's latest bitfield
optimization improvements patch
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg01397.html)?
It did not. Here are the 8-bit and 9-bit numbers with that patch:
--enable-bootstrap, --disable-checking, Alexandre's patch, 8-bit tree codes:
real 0m51.815s
user 0m41.282s
sys 0m0.470s
--enable-bootstrap, --disable-checking, Alexandre's patch, 9-bit tree codes:
real 0m54.627s
user 0m43.574s
sys 0m0.406s
Looks like a 1% improvement. Not bad, but not spectacular.
What about the 16-bit tree code?
I don't have these around, and I mistakenly updated my tree, so the
numbers below are, unfortunately, incomparable to the numbers above.
The disturbing fact is that mainline seems to be significantly slower
now than it was in my previous tests (from just a few days ago), and
the slowdown (20%) is much greater than any of the slowdowns we've
been discussing in this thread. Has anyone else noticed this, or
perhaps it's something in my environment?
Anyway, today's results for tramp3d, run a couple times until the
numbers stabilized:
8-bit tree code, --enable-bootstrap, --disable-checking:
real 0m50.445s
user 0m49.648s baseline
sys 0m0.481s
9-bit tree code, ---enable-bootstrap, -disable-checking:
real 0m53.550s
user 0m52.645s 6% slower
sys 0m0.477s
9-bit tree code, ---enable-bootstrap, -disable-checking, with
Alexandre's latest patch:
real 0m52.787s
user 0m52.304s 5% slower
sys 0m0.464s
16-bit tree code, --enable-bootstrap, --disable-checking:
real 0m50.965s
user 0m50.315s 1% slower
sys 0m0.477s
Cheers,
Doug
