[darktable-dev] Re: clang vs. gcc: dramatic performance difference

2018-09-15 Thread Matthias Bodenbinder
Am 15.09.18 um 10:30 schrieb Matthias Andree: > Are you looking at stripped files, or what does "size" print? Are Here is what "size" is saying: clang binaries: 4# size * textdata bss dec hex filename 2233 672 82913 b61 darktable 975972400 48 1

[darktable-dev] Re: clang vs. gcc: dramatic performance difference

2018-09-15 Thread Matthias Bodenbinder
Am 15.09.18 um 10:30 schrieb Matthias Andree: > Are you looking at stripped files, or what does "size" print? Are > optimization options similar? The only changes I made are these in build.sh: export CC=/usr/bin/clang export CXX=/usr/bin/clang++ INSTALL_PREFIX_DEFAULT="/opt/darktable-clang" I do

Re: [darktable-dev] Re: clang vs. gcc: dramatic performance difference

2018-09-15 Thread Matthias Andree
Am 15.09.18 um 09:40 schrieb Matthias Bodenbinder: > Am 13.09.18 um 07:38 schrieb Matthias Bodenbinder: >> export CC=/usr/bin/clang >> export CXX=/usr/bin/clang++ >> INSTALL_PREFIX_DEFAULT="/opt/darktable-clang" >> > This is working now. I had to remove the build directory after editing > build.sh

[darktable-dev] Re: clang vs. gcc: dramatic performance difference

2018-09-15 Thread Matthias Bodenbinder
Am 13.09.18 um 07:38 schrieb Matthias Bodenbinder: > export CC=/usr/bin/clang > export CXX=/usr/bin/clang++ > INSTALL_PREFIX_DEFAULT="/opt/darktable-clang" > This is working now. I had to remove the build directory after editing build.sh I have the following packages installed on Manjaro: clang

[darktable-dev] Re: clang vs. gcc: dramatic performance difference

2018-09-14 Thread Matthias Bodenbinder
Am 14.09.18 um 10:15 schrieb johannes hanika: > hi, > > clang needs libomp-dev, not libgomp which gcc uses. i assume you have > that installed? There is no such package in manjaro. I have openmp 6.0.1-1 with these files install /usr/include/omp.h /usr/include/ompt.h /usr/lib/libiomp5.so /usr/

Re: [darktable-dev] Re: clang vs. gcc: dramatic performance difference

2018-09-14 Thread johannes hanika
hi, clang needs libomp-dev, not libgomp which gcc uses. i assume you have that installed? cheers, jo On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 5:45 AM Matthias Bodenbinder wrote: > > Am 13.09.18 um 15:58 schrieb sturmflut: > > Hi all, > > > > IIRC this has something to do with clang not linking against libatomic

[darktable-dev] Re: clang vs. gcc: dramatic performance difference

2018-09-13 Thread Matthias Bodenbinder
Am 13.09.18 um 15:58 schrieb sturmflut: > Hi all, > > IIRC this has something to do with clang not linking against libatomic > by default, but GCC doing so. > > regards, > Simon And how to I make this happen with clang? _

Re: [darktable-dev] Re: clang vs. gcc: dramatic performance difference

2018-09-13 Thread sturmflut
Hi all, IIRC this has something to do with clang not linking against libatomic by default, but GCC doing so. regards, Simon On 9/13/18 7:49 AM, Matthias Bodenbinder wrote: > Am 13.09.18 um 07:38 schrieb Matthias Bodenbinder: >> I assume I am missing some significant compiler options for clang.

[darktable-dev] Re: clang vs. gcc: dramatic performance difference

2018-09-12 Thread Matthias Bodenbinder
Am 13.09.18 um 07:38 schrieb Matthias Bodenbinder: > I assume I am missing some significant compiler options for clang. But dont > know what that is. > Can somebody help me with that and tell me what I need to do to make the > clang binary faster? I found these messages with clang enabled: -- C