Re: intel i5 - core? or core2?
On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 6:25 PM, Anonymous swel...@gmail.com wrote:
Domagoj S. rank1see...@gmail.com writes:
8.1 RELEASE 32bit
# gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.2.1 20070719 [FreeBSD]
As per: http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.2/changes.html
core2 is supported
It's not! `core' and `core2' for -mtune/-march introduced since gcc43.
Ups!
I've been confusing FreeBSD's 'CPUTYPE' with gcc's '-march='
BTW, while clang in base (on /head) supports -march=core2 it's still
better to stick to -march=native, e.g. on my box
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E8400 @ 3.00GHz (3177.07-MHz K8-class
CPU)
`native' on clang implies `penryn', not a `core2'. While `native' on
gcc45 implies `core2' + extra cflags[1].
[1] -mcx16 -msahf -msse4.1 --param l1-cache-size=32 --param
l1-cache-line-size=64 --param l2-cache-size=6144
I see..., so I should always go against FBSD devs and ensure that
gcc's arg '-march=' is always populated by value 'native'?
That is, gcc should alone determine CPU? Not a human user and then
setting discovered CPU type in CPUTYPE?
You can populate MACHINE_CPU directly, e.g.
CPUTYPE ?= native
MACHINE_CPU != echo ${MACHINE_ARCH}; ${CC} -E -dM -v -march=${CPUTYPE} -
/dev/null 21 \
| awk '/SSE|MMX/ !/MATH/ { FS=__; gsub(_,.,$$2); print
tolower($$2) }'
MACHINE_CPU += i486 i586 i686
Note sure how well it'll work for cross-arch compilation, though.
Setting CPUTYPE will populate MACHINE_CPU.
Then I can ensure gcc's arg '-march=native' by setting:
CFLAGS=-O2 -pipe -march=native
But CPUTYPE will also append it's own '-march=', so to stop it:
NO_CPU_CFLAGS=yes
I've also saw recommendation to add:
COPTFLAGS=-O2 -pipe -march=native
NO_CPU_COPTFLAGS=yes
But I didn't see that CPUTYPE, has ever set COPTFLAGS?
So now I am totally confused with all this options?
What is the right way?
CPUTYPE?=native is nowhere mentioned in FreeBSD
That cruft in bsd.cpu.mk was written in pre-gcc4 days, i.e. when it
didn't support -march=native. Besides, if not maintained to accommodate
for newer gcc's from ports those aliases are more harmful than
useful. And not much code uses MACHINE_CPU in base anyway, only
libcrypto and libz.
So if I decide to use a latest compiler from ports, I MUST avoid usage
of CPUTYPE?
Finally, should I use latest gcc compiler from ports, to build world
kernel, with:
CFLAGS=-O2 -pipe -march=native
COPTFLAGS=-O2 -pipe -march=native
MACHINE_CPU=???
And a, regarding speed, please in percentage and taking regular binary
install from .iso, as a speed of value 100%, to be compared against.
What kind of gain, is compared to compilation from source:
a) Without any variables set in /etc/make.conf or passed on CMD
b) Only CPUTYPE var set, as officially recommended
c) Appending CFLAGS, NO_CPU_CFLAGS ... to b)
d) Using latest gcc from ports
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: intel i5 - core? or core2?
8.1 RELEASE 32bit # gcc --version gcc (GCC) 4.2.1 20070719 [FreeBSD] As per: http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.2/changes.html core2 is supported Setting CPUTYPE(for i386) to: nocona, core or core2, will at the end, ALWAYS set CPUTYPE to: prescott, which again results in set: MACHINE_CPU = sse3 sse2 sse i686 mmx i586 i486 i386 CPUTYPE?=native is nowhere mentioned in FreeBSD ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: intel i5 - core? or core2?
2010/8/21 Garrett Cooper gcoo...@freebsd.org: On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Atom Smasher a...@smasher.org wrote: hardware: MACH: x86_64 (LENOVO, 4313CTO, ThinkPad T510) CPU: x86_64 (Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU M 540 @ 2.53GHz) FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE #0 (amd64) in /etc/make.conf i tried setting CPUTYPE=core but as soon as i start building things, lang/perl5.10 fails, complaining about core not being right. when i change the setting to CPUTYPE=core2 it builds fine. is something wrong? i thought the i5 was core, not core2...? I thought our base gcc didn't support core/core2 (IIRC gcc 4.4+ supports core/core2). Maybe this is a documentation bug with .../share/examples/etc/make.conf ? CPYTYPE is make.conf and -march in gcc are different things. After a lot of reading (/usr/share/examples/etc/make.conf and man gcc) and testing, here is what I use for my core2 : CPUTYPE=core2 CFLAGS=-O2 -pipe -march=native NO_CPU_CFLAGS=yes COPTFLAGS=-O2 -pipe -march=native NO_CPU_COPTFLAGS=yes I think you can use the same for your i5. Thanks, -Garrett ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- Olivier Smedts _ ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) e-mail: oliv...@gid0.org - against HTML email vCards X www: http://www.gid0.org - against proprietary attachments / \ Il y a seulement 10 sortes de gens dans le monde : ceux qui comprennent le binaire, et ceux qui ne le comprennent pas. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: intel i5 - core? or core2?
Domagoj S. rank1see...@gmail.com writes:
8.1 RELEASE 32bit
# gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.2.1 20070719 [FreeBSD]
As per: http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.2/changes.html
core2 is supported
It's not! `core' and `core2' for -mtune/-march introduced since gcc43.
$ echo 'int main(){}' | gcc -xc - -o/dev/null -march=core
:1: error: bad value (core) for -march= switch
:1: error: bad value (core) for -mtune= switch
$ echo 'int main(){}' | gcc -xc - -o/dev/null -march=core2
:1: error: bad value (core2) for -march= switch
:1: error: bad value (core2) for -mtune= switch
Setting CPUTYPE to `core2' on amd64 will only add `sse3' to MACHINE_CPU,
even when the underlying compiler/assembler actually supports more
features, e.g. ssse3, sse4.1, etc., cf. conf/112997.
BTW, while clang in base (on /head) supports -march=core2 it's still
better to stick to -march=native, e.g. on my box
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E8400 @ 3.00GHz (3177.07-MHz K8-class
CPU)
`native' on clang implies `penryn', not a `core2'. While `native' on
gcc45 implies `core2' + extra cflags[1].
[1] -mcx16 -msahf -msse4.1 --param l1-cache-size=32 --param
l1-cache-line-size=64 --param l2-cache-size=6144
Setting CPUTYPE(for i386) to: nocona, core or core2, will at
the end, ALWAYS set CPUTYPE to: prescott, which again results in
set:
MACHINE_CPU = sse3 sse2 sse i686 mmx i586 i486 i386
You can populate MACHINE_CPU directly, e.g.
CPUTYPE ?= native
MACHINE_CPU != echo ${MACHINE_ARCH}; ${CC} -E -dM -v -march=${CPUTYPE} -
/dev/null 21 \
| awk '/SSE|MMX/ !/MATH/ { FS=__; gsub(_,.,$$2); print
tolower($$2) }'
MACHINE_CPU += i486 i586 i686
Note sure how well it'll work for cross-arch compilation, though.
CPUTYPE?=native is nowhere mentioned in FreeBSD
That cruft in bsd.cpu.mk was written in pre-gcc4 days, i.e. when it
didn't support -march=native. Besides, if not maintained to accommodate
for newer gcc's from ports those aliases are more harmful than
useful. And not much code uses MACHINE_CPU in base anyway, only
libcrypto and libz.
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: intel i5 - core? or core2?
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Atom Smasher a...@smasher.org wrote: hardware: MACH: x86_64 (LENOVO, 4313CTO, ThinkPad T510) CPU: x86_64 (Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU M 540 @ 2.53GHz) FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE #0 (amd64) in /etc/make.conf i tried setting CPUTYPE=core but as soon as i start building things, lang/perl5.10 fails, complaining about core not being right. when i change the setting to CPUTYPE=core2 it builds fine. is something wrong? i thought the i5 was core, not core2...? I thought our base gcc didn't support core/core2 (IIRC gcc 4.4+ supports core/core2). Maybe this is a documentation bug with .../share/examples/etc/make.conf ? Thanks, -Garrett ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: intel i5 - core? or core2?
Atom Smasher a...@smasher.org writes: hardware: MACH: x86_64 (LENOVO, 4313CTO, ThinkPad T510) CPU: x86_64 (Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU M 540 @ 2.53GHz) FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE #0 (amd64) in /etc/make.conf i tried setting CPUTYPE=core but as soon as i start building things, lang/perl5.10 fails, complaining about core not being right. when i change the setting to CPUTYPE=core2 it builds fine. I'd suggest using CPUTYPE?=native and let the compiler decide what's best. Our pretty old gcc in base supports neither `core' nor `core2'. The `core2' is just an alias for `nocona'/`prescott' for amd64/i386. And `core' alias is available only for i386, cf. bsd.cpu.mk. is something wrong? i thought the i5 was core, not core2...? ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
