Were you able to deduce anything from the test results? On 11 May 2014 23:02, "Juergen Sauermann" <juergen.sauerm...@t-online.de> wrote:
> Hi Elias, > > thanks, already interesting. If you could loop around the core count: > > *for ((i=1; $i<=80; ++i)); do* > * ./Parallel $i* > * ./Parallel_OMP $i* > *done* > > then I could understand the data better. Also not sure if something > is wrong with the benchmark program. On my new 4-core with OMP I get > fluctuations from: > > eedjsa@server65 ~/apl-1.3/tools $ ./Parallel_OMP 4 > Pass 0: 4 cores/threads, 8229949 cycles total > Pass 1: 4 cores/threads, 8262 cycles total > Pass 2: 4 cores/threads, 4035 cycles total > Pass 3: 4 cores/threads, 4126 cycles total > Pass 4: 4 cores/threads, 4179 cycles total > > to: > > eedjsa@server65 ~/apl-1.3/tools $ ./Parallel_OMP 4 > Pass 0: 4 cores/threads, 11368032 cycles total > Pass 1: 4 cores/threads, 4042228 cycles total > Pass 2: 4 cores/threads, 7251419 cycles total > Pass 3: 4 cores/threads, 3846 cycles total > Pass 4: 4 cores/threads, 2725 cycles total > > The fluctuations with the manual parallel for are smaller: > > Pass 0: 4 cores/threads, 87225 cycles total > Pass 1: 4 cores/threads, 245046 cycles total > Pass 2: 4 cores/threads, 84632 cycles total > Pass 3: 4 cores/threads, 63619 cycles total > Pass 4: 4 cores/threads, 93437 cycles total > > but still considerable. The picture so far suggests that OMP fluctuates > much > more (in the start-up + sync time) than manual with the highest OMP > start-up above manual > and the lowest far below. One change on my TODO list is to use futexes > instead of mutexes > (like OMP does), probably not an issue under Solaris sunce futextes are > linux-specific. > > /// Jürgen > > > On 05/11/2014 04:23 AM, Elias Mårtenson wrote: > > Here are the files that I promised earlier. > > Regards, > Elias > > >
