On Thursday 05 March 2009 16:34:23 Bill Hart wrote: > At present I don't think we have any. This was always difficult to > handle in yasm anyway and is an open ticket. > > Did you write any? If not, we can safely ignore for now. I'll add a > note to the relevant ticket so that gets fixed for any multifunc files > in future. > > Do you want to update the grep in configure and do autoconf, etc. and > I'll run mpirbench again to check the 2% comes back. >
Did you edit *.as with a dos style ending ie CR/LF ? > Bill. > > 2009/3/5 <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com>: > > On Thursday 05 March 2009 16:29:30 Bill Hart wrote: > >> I'd prefer to change the grep to include a search for GLOBAL_FUNC > >> mpn_name. > > > > No problem , how do we multi-function files ? > > - Show quoted text - > > > >> Bill. > >> > >> 2009/3/5 <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com>: > >> > On Thursday 05 March 2009 16:19:32 Bill Hart wrote: > >> >> Even if it is by filename, it might not recognise them now that they > >> >> are .as files. > >> > > >> > looks like it just grep's *.asm or *.as for the keyword > >> > PROLOGUE(mpn_name) so perhaps we could put PROLOGUE(mpn_name) in the > >> > *.as as a empty macro? - Show quoted text - > >> > > >> >> 2009/3/5 Bill Hart <goodwillh...@googlemail.com>: > >> >> > Don't the M4 macros PROLOGUE(mpn_blah) in the .asm files trigger > >> >> > this? Now that they are .as files with GLOBAL_FUNC mpn_blah instead > >> >> > of PROLOGUE(mpn_blah) it just thinks the functions don't exist. Or > >> >> > does it do by filename. > >> >> > > >> >> > Bill. > >> >> > > >> >> > 2009/3/5 <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com>: > >> >> >> On Thursday 05 March 2009 16:10:04 Bill Hart wrote: > >> >> >>> Then this surely affects the Windows bench as well as the linux > >> >> >>> one. I see it is used in Toom multiplication. > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> Happy days. There's your 2% missing for Windows! > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I'm not so sure , the problem is in configure.in , before > >> >> >> configure generates config.h with our HAVE_NATIVE_mpn_addlsh1_n > >> >> >> etc , and now its empty > >> >> > > >> >> > - Show quoted text - > >> >> > > >> >> >> - Show quoted text - > >> >> >> > >> >> >>> Bill. > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> 2009/3/5 <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com>: > >> >> >>> > On Thursday 05 March 2009 16:05:46 Bill Hart wrote: > >> >> >>> >> Would the loss of these also affect the mpirbench? > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > yes > >> >> >>> > - Show quoted text - > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> >> Bill. > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >>> >> 2009/3/5 <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com>: > >> >> >>> >> > The conversion from gas to yasm have lost the defines > >> >> >>> >> > HAVE_NATIVE_* > >> >> >>> >> > so that addlsh1_n etc dont appear in speed or try > >> >> >>> >> > > >> >> >>> >> > > >> >> >>> >> > > >> >> >>> >> > On Thursday 05 March 2009 13:38:29 Bill Hart wrote: > >> >> >>> >> > - Show quoted text - > >> >> >>> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> 2009/3/5 <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com>: > >> >> >>> >> >> > On Wednesday 04 March 2009 23:56:48 Bill Hart wrote: > >> >> >>> >> >> >> I've had a think, especially considering the 10's of > >> >> >>> >> >> >> thousands of people who will be using MPIR in Sage, not > >> >> >>> >> >> >> to mention the sponsor, and I think we need to write try > >> >> >>> >> >> >> tests for the mpn functions we use. > >> >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> We could divide the work in half by one person writing > >> >> >>> >> >> >> the reference tests and the other writing the lt-try > >> >> >>> >> >> >> tests. I volunteer to write the reference tests. I may > >> >> >>> >> >> >> be able to start this tomorrow after I finish with > >> >> >>> >> >> >> converting the core 2 code to yasm. > >> >> >>> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> > I can do half or all if you want ,although if may be > >> >> >>> >> >> > better if I didn't write either , so if I have made a > >> >> >>> >> >> > mistake , you are unlikely to repeat the same mistake . > >> >> >>> >> >> > Note: > >> >> >>> >> >> > lshift1,rshift1 are just macros on non-amd systems > >> >> >>> >> >> > lshift1,rshift1 overlap requirements are same or separate > >> >> >>> >> >> > ONLY redc_basecase,sumdiff has a mpn/generic written by > >> >> >>> >> >> > someone else addsub returns int not limb > >> >> >>> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> > looking at try it allready has tests for sumdiff ,addlsh1 > >> >> >>> >> >> > ,sublsh1 > >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> None of those appear in the list when you run try without > >> >> >>> >> >> parameters. We should add those to the list. > >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> > so we only need new tests for > >> >> >>> >> >> > redc_basecase,lshift1,rshift1,addadd,addsub > >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> Cool. Do you want to add some tests assuming there is a > >> >> >>> >> >> reference implementation available to test against, and > >> >> >>> >> >> I'll write the reference implementation. That's good enough > >> >> >>> >> >> for me. If a different person writes the reference > >> >> >>> >> >> implementation to the original then it's a pretty good > >> >> >>> >> >> test. > >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> Bill. > >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> > - Show quoted text - > >> >> >>> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> Bill. > >> >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> 2009/3/4 <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com>: > >> >> >>> >> >> >> > On Wednesday 04 March 2009 23:24:59 Bill Hart wrote: > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> Is there a test for lshift1, rshift1, addlsh1, > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> addrsh1, addadd, addsub, sumdiff, divebyff or > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> redc_basecase? > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> Do we need tests for these? > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> I know we use addadd and addsub. Do we use any of the > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> others yet? > >> >> >>> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> > we use lshift1 rshift1 addlsh1 sublsh1 sumdiff > >> >> >>> >> >> >> > redc_basecase we dont use divebyff > >> >> >>> >> >> >> > make check run tests for all these , but nothing in > >> >> >>> >> >> >> > ./try - Show quoted text - > >> >> >>> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> Bill. > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> 2009/3/4 Bill Hart <goodwillh...@googlemail.com>: > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > 2009/3/4 <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com>: > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> On Wednesday 04 March 2009 22:40:18 Bill Hart wrote: > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> I'd like to propose a code freeze on all K8/K10 > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> assembly code, which I have now converted to yasm > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> format, unless serious bugs are uncovered. > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> If we freeze the code then we can begin testing. > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> I propose we wear out each and every file with > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> /tests/devel/try including many small operands > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> and as many different types of data as try can > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> throw at it. > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> There no point both of us running the same test on > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> cuda1 say , so who does which machine? > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > I am currently running tests on a K8. > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > Do you want to do cuda? > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > That will be enough. > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > Let me just check that: > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > wbh...@host-57-44:~/mpir-trunk/tests/devel$ ./try > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > -s 1-50 -r 10 -S 1-50 mpn_blah blah blah > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > does something sensible according to you? > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> On my machine the K8 code gets a bench of 15283 > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> which is what it got before the conversion. Also > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> on K10 I did cycle timings of all the functions > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> we care about and they did not change (to within > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> tolerances due to variations between runs of > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> course). > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> I'm inclined to finish the core 2 code conversion > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> tomorrow, do some cleaning up of the C code > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> (insert some whitespace > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> :-)) and then release 1.0.0. It's just about as > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> : much work > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> as releasing 0.9.1. > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> wasting precious bytes with whitespace :) > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > Now we know what is causing that 2 Trillion dollar > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > debt!! > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> I thought I ran my C-code thru indent first , to > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> use the standard format , perhaps I missed some > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> files. I really find difficult to believe that > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> people read code formated with the standard amount > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> of whitespace , I'm forever scrolling up and down > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> to try to see the rest of the function.First thing > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> I do when reading code now is to delete most > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> whitespace. > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > Maybe I won't have much to do. I did see some code > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > the other day that I would instinctively do some > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > things to however. It's just a knee-jerk reaction. > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > I used to despise whitespace too. However I did > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > change my mind after certain other programmer told > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > me my code was sending them crosseyed. Now I like > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > the sense of peace that one gets from the > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > whitespace. It's like having a spacious office as > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > opposed to clutter. Obviously I accept it is a > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > matter of preference and irrelevant in the scheme > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > of things. However I have observed that the > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > majority tend to go for space. > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> By the way, make check still runs the yasm tests. > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> It was quite a job do disable all the tests , so I > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> left it , as it doesn't effect the correctness > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> - Show quoted text - > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > That's fine. No problem by me. > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> > Bill. > >> >> >>> >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> >> >> > - Show quoted text - > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mpir-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to mpir-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mpir-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---