ni...@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) writes: I have tweaked the tuneup parameters a bit. I removed min_size for HGCD_APPR_THRESHOLD (was 30, now uses the default of 10). This threshold is definitely lower than I had expected. On http://gmplib.org/devel/HGCD_APPR_THRESHOLD.html, it's 10 on one machine (itanium2), and 11 or 12 on several 64-bit machines (x86_64 and power). I suppose 10 is still too high then. Or doesn't the code support lower values?
The spreading of measured values for k10/k8 makes me suspect that something might not be right. All k10 and k8 machines using 64-bit limbs get values less then 30, but one is far off that: gcc12.fsffrance.org 171 These machines have two nehalem generation CPUs: biko-solaris64.gmplib.org 169 gcc20.fsffrance.org 12 (There is a slight difference in integer division performance, but I doubt you're using integer division.) I also increased max_size and step_factor for HGCD_REDUCE_THRESHOLD. That might have broken tuneup a bit, I see results are missing for a large number of machines for last night. Typical values seem to be a few thousand limbs. Missing values are not alarming, (many) red ones are. Things look good now. Most of the GMP testing is nowadays done on emulators or under virtualisers; running tuneup there makes limited sense. -- Torbjörn _______________________________________________ gmp-devel mailing list gmp-devel@gmplib.org http://gmplib.org/mailman/listinfo/gmp-devel
