On 5/2/13 3:58 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > callgrind has the *fabulous* kcachegrind front-end, but it only > measures memory access performance on a simulated machine, which is > very useful sometimes (if you're trying to optimize cache locality), > but there's no guarantee that the bottlenecks on its simulated machine > are the same as the bottlenecks on your real machine.
Agreed, there is no guarantee, but my experience is that kcachegrind normally gives you a pretty decent view of cache faults and hence it can do pretty good predictions on how this affects your computations. I have used this feature extensively for optimizing parts of the Blosc compressor, and I cannot be more happier (to the point that, if it were not for Valgrind, I could not figure out many interesting memory access optimizations). -- Francesc Alted _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion