Hi!
> I have conducted some experiments to compare kernels built with -O2
> and -O3. Here are the results:
>
> Application Performance O2 Performance O3 Improvement
> Apache 127814.14 req/s 130321.24 req/s 1.96%
> Nginx537589.08 req/s 556723.32 req/s 3.56%
> MySQL
Hi!
I have conducted some experiments to compare kernels built with -O2
and -O3. Here are the results:
Application Performance O2 Performance O3 Improvement
Apache 127814.14 req/s 130321.24 req/s 1.96%
Nginx537589.08 req/s 556723.32 req/s 3.56%
MySQL70661.38
On 2015-04-08 09:19, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
2015-04-08 20:06 GMT+08:00 Austin S Hemmelgarn :
I can't remember any off the top of my head, but it does say explicitly in
the GCC manual to be careful with -O3. IIRC, most of the issues relate to
-O3 enabling -ffast-math (which tends to really mess
Am 08.04.2015 um 15:16 schrieb Pengfei Yuan:
> 2015-04-08 20:19 GMT+08:00 Richard Weinberger :
>> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Pengfei Yuan <0xcool...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Could you please provide some examples that I can investigate?
>>> Thanks!
>>
>> It would be awesome if you could find out
2015-04-08 20:06 GMT+08:00 Austin S Hemmelgarn :
> I can't remember any off the top of my head, but it does say explicitly in
> the GCC manual to be careful with -O3. IIRC, most of the issues relate to
> -O3 enabling -ffast-math (which tends to really mess with code that expects
> strict IEEE 754
2015-04-08 20:19 GMT+08:00 Richard Weinberger :
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Pengfei Yuan <0xcool...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Could you please provide some examples that I can investigate?
>> Thanks!
>
> It would be awesome if you could find out which gcc optimizations
> cause the speed up.
>
> I can't remember any off the top of my head, but it does say explicitly
> in the GCC manual to be careful with -O3. IIRC, most of the issues
> relate to -O3 enabling -ffast-math (which tends to really mess with code
> that expects strict IEEE 754 compliance), so it may not be as much of an
On 2015-04-08 08:19, Richard Weinberger wrote:
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Pengfei Yuan <0xcool...@gmail.com> wrote:
Could you please provide some examples that I can investigate?
Thanks!
It would be awesome if you could find out which gcc optimizations
cause the speed up.
"gcc -c -Q -O3
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Pengfei Yuan <0xcool...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Could you please provide some examples that I can investigate?
> Thanks!
It would be awesome if you could find out which gcc optimizations
cause the speed up.
"gcc -c -Q -O3 --help=optimizers" will help you.
Please also
On 2015-04-07 21:00, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
Could you please provide some examples that I can investigate?
Thanks!
2015-04-08 2:05 GMT+08:00 Austin S Hemmelgarn :
On 2015-04-07 06:09, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 15:56 +0800, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
I am trying legacy GCC versions.
On 2015-04-07 21:00, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
Could you please provide some examples that I can investigate?
Thanks!
2015-04-08 2:05 GMT+08:00 Austin S Hemmelgarn ahferro...@gmail.com:
On 2015-04-07 06:09, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 15:56 +0800, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
I am trying
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Pengfei Yuan 0xcool...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you please provide some examples that I can investigate?
Thanks!
It would be awesome if you could find out which gcc optimizations
cause the speed up.
gcc -c -Q -O3 --help=optimizers will help you.
Please also double
2015-04-08 20:06 GMT+08:00 Austin S Hemmelgarn ahferro...@gmail.com:
I can't remember any off the top of my head, but it does say explicitly in
the GCC manual to be careful with -O3. IIRC, most of the issues relate to
-O3 enabling -ffast-math (which tends to really mess with code that expects
I can't remember any off the top of my head, but it does say explicitly
in the GCC manual to be careful with -O3. IIRC, most of the issues
relate to -O3 enabling -ffast-math (which tends to really mess with code
that expects strict IEEE 754 compliance), so it may not be as much of an
2015-04-08 20:19 GMT+08:00 Richard Weinberger richard.weinber...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Pengfei Yuan 0xcool...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you please provide some examples that I can investigate?
Thanks!
It would be awesome if you could find out which gcc optimizations
cause
On 2015-04-08 09:19, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
2015-04-08 20:06 GMT+08:00 Austin S Hemmelgarn ahferro...@gmail.com:
I can't remember any off the top of my head, but it does say explicitly in
the GCC manual to be careful with -O3. IIRC, most of the issues relate to
-O3 enabling -ffast-math (which
Am 08.04.2015 um 15:16 schrieb Pengfei Yuan:
2015-04-08 20:19 GMT+08:00 Richard Weinberger richard.weinber...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Pengfei Yuan 0xcool...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you please provide some examples that I can investigate?
Thanks!
It would be awesome if you
On 2015-04-08 08:19, Richard Weinberger wrote:
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Pengfei Yuan 0xcool...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you please provide some examples that I can investigate?
Thanks!
It would be awesome if you could find out which gcc optimizations
cause the speed up.
gcc -c -Q -O3
Could you please provide some examples that I can investigate?
Thanks!
2015-04-08 2:05 GMT+08:00 Austin S Hemmelgarn :
> On 2015-04-07 06:09, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>> On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 15:56 +0800, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
>>> I am trying legacy GCC versions.
>>> But I am not able to try different
On 2015-04-07 06:09, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 15:56 +0800, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
>> I am trying legacy GCC versions.
>> But I am not able to try different architectures.
>
> The point of my reply wasn't to get you to actually test the world ;-)
>
> I was indirectly pointing
On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 15:56 +0800, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
> I am trying legacy GCC versions.
> But I am not able to try different architectures.
The point of my reply wasn't to get you to actually test the world ;-)
I was indirectly pointing out that "works for me" is not good enough
On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 10:07 +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>
> He did say optional. So I'd imagine it would be a Kconfig of its own.
> So the default can be as today, but people that want to experiment
> need not hack the source code.
Anybody wanting to play with it will just twiddle the Makefile.
I am trying legacy GCC versions.
But I am not able to try different architectures.
2015-04-07 14:43 GMT+08:00 Mike Galbraith :
> On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 11:37 +0800, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have conducted some experiments to compare kernels built with -O2
>> and -O3. Here are the
On 04/07/2015 09:43 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 11:37 +0800, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have conducted some experiments to compare kernels built with -O2
>> and -O3. Here are the results:
>>
>> Application Performance O2 Performance O3 Improvement
>> Apache
On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 11:37 +0800, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have conducted some experiments to compare kernels built with -O2
> and -O3. Here are the results:
>
> Application Performance O2 Performance O3 Improvement
> Apache 127814.14 req/s 130321.24 req/s 1.96%
> Nginx
On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 10:07 +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
He did say optional. So I'd imagine it would be a Kconfig of its own.
So the default can be as today, but people that want to experiment
need not hack the source code.
Anybody wanting to play with it will just twiddle the Makefile.
I am trying legacy GCC versions.
But I am not able to try different architectures.
2015-04-07 14:43 GMT+08:00 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com:
On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 11:37 +0800, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
Hi,
I have conducted some experiments to compare kernels built with -O2
and -O3. Here
On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 11:37 +0800, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
Hi,
I have conducted some experiments to compare kernels built with -O2
and -O3. Here are the results:
Application Performance O2 Performance O3 Improvement
Apache 127814.14 req/s 130321.24 req/s 1.96%
Nginx
On 04/07/2015 09:43 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 11:37 +0800, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
Hi,
I have conducted some experiments to compare kernels built with -O2
and -O3. Here are the results:
Application Performance O2 Performance O3 Improvement
Apache 127814.14
On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 15:56 +0800, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
I am trying legacy GCC versions.
But I am not able to try different architectures.
The point of my reply wasn't to get you to actually test the world ;-)
I was indirectly pointing out that works for me is not good enough
justification.
On 2015-04-07 06:09, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 15:56 +0800, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
I am trying legacy GCC versions.
But I am not able to try different architectures.
The point of my reply wasn't to get you to actually test the world ;-)
I was indirectly pointing out that
Could you please provide some examples that I can investigate?
Thanks!
2015-04-08 2:05 GMT+08:00 Austin S Hemmelgarn ahferro...@gmail.com:
On 2015-04-07 06:09, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 15:56 +0800, Pengfei Yuan wrote:
I am trying legacy GCC versions.
But I am not able to
Hi,
I have conducted some experiments to compare kernels built with -O2
and -O3. Here are the results:
Application Performance O2 Performance O3 Improvement
Apache 127814.14 req/s 130321.24 req/s 1.96%
Nginx537589.08 req/s 556723.32 req/s 3.56%
MySQL70661.38 tx/s
Hi,
I have conducted some experiments to compare kernels built with -O2
and -O3. Here are the results:
Application Performance O2 Performance O3 Improvement
Apache 127814.14 req/s 130321.24 req/s 1.96%
Nginx537589.08 req/s 556723.32 req/s 3.56%
MySQL70661.38 tx/s
34 matches
Mail list logo
