On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 11:04:43AM -0500, Michael Dickens wrote:
> On Mar 5, 2007, at 11:21 PM, Eric Blossom wrote:
> >you made two changes:
> >
> > -g1 -> -g
> > -O1 -> -O2
> >
> >Does -g -O1 work on PPC-OSX?
> >
> >We really want to "turn down" the level of optimization used while
> >compiling the SWIG stuff. The SWIG stuff is not performance critical,
> >and using a lower level of optimization speeds up the compilation.
>
> Here are the results of "time make -j3" from compiling with different
> options (as listed; run only once, so not statistically significant
> but still useful). After compiling, I run "make check" and it either
> works ("+") or doesn't ("-") in the sense of ticket:141.
>
> 1) "-g -O2"
> Intel +: 514.437u 225.594s 7:28.93 164.8% 0+0k 159+2045io 0pf+0w
> PPC +: 790.567u 437.716s 11:45.85 174.0% 0+0k 12+2514io 0pf+0w
>
> 2) "-g1 -O2"
> Intel +: 511.048u 227.164s 7:23.83 166.3% 0+0k 115+2063io 0pf+0w
> PPC +: 779.509u 435.124s 11:35.84 174.5% 0+0k 1+2317io 0pf+0w
>
> 3) "-g -O1"
> Intel +: 485.501u 229.842s 7:20.63 162.3% 0+0k 0+2061io 0pf+0w
> PPC -: 729.166u 436.894s 11:10.46 173.9% 0+0k 0+2395io 0pf+0w
>
> 4) "-g1 -O1"
> Intel +: 481.946u 229.679s 7:11.07 165.0% 0+0k 0+1975io 0pf+0w
> PPC -: 724.620u 443.608s 11:10.59 174.2% 0+0k 0+2394io 0pf+0w
>
> Thus for PPC-OSX, (2) is the best choice while for Intel-OSX (4) is
> the best. I've modified configure.ac to handle those cases, and it
> works fine on both PPC- and Intel-OSX for me. Again, it won't affect
> any OS except Darwin.
>
> NOTE: On PPC-OSX, those that work ("+") always get the following
> failure:
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> FAIL: test_pll_refout (__main__.test_sig_source)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "./qa_pll_freqdet.py", line 158, in test_pll_refout
> self.assertFloatTuplesAlmostEqual (expected_result, dst_data, 4)
> File "/GNURadio/t141/gnuradio-core/src/python/gnuradio/
> gr_unittest.py", line 86, in assertFloatTuplesAlmostEqual
> self.assertAlmostEqual (a[i], b[i], places, msg)
> AssertionError: 98.939748723299999 != 98.939695362490014 within 4 places
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
Thanks for running all the experiments.
Regarding the failure in test_pll_refout, I suspect that this depends
on minor differences in floating point implementations. E.g.,
x87 FPU, scalar SSE, or Altivec. I think we should just ease the
criterion on the test. Will you please change the "4" to a "3"?
With regard to the real failures in the two -O1 cases, that looks like
a genuine compiler bug.
Eric
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
