On 11/26/11 02:26 PM, Tak Pui Lou wrote:
On Nov 25, 2011, at 12:23 PM, C. Bergström wrote:
On 11/25/11 04:38 PM, Tak Pui Lou wrote:
Hello,
I have tested the port from
http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/path64-devel-20111117.tar.bz2 and
http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/path64-20111115.tar.xz but the compiler failed
in the following tests:
3/6 Test #3: regression_tests .................***Failed 0.81 sec
Start 4: hello_c
4/6 Test #4: hello_c .......................... Passed 0.14 sec
Start 5: hello_cpp
5/6 Test #5: hello_cpp ........................ Passed 0.67 sec
Start 6: path64_bootstrap_test
6/6 Test #6: path64_bootstrap_test ............***Failed 42.28 sec
67% tests passed, 2 tests failed out of 6
Total Test time (real) = 44.74 sec
The following tests FAILED:
3 - regression_tests (Failed)
6 - path64_bootstrap_test (Failed)
Errors while running CTest
Are these known errors for that build?
Normally I'd bug you about using vanilla upstream, but in this case I think
JK's branch is in better shape. (Apologies about not merging it yet, but we
have a QA project we'll be testing it with and open sourcing soon - compiler
agnostic fwiw)
I did search on the Internet to check if the upstream has got the patches
merged or not. But, I did not find too much information about this. So, I tried
JK's branch instead. When you feel that I should try the source on github,
please let me know.
Specifically about your question - It's probably unexpected and I'm curious
what processor and version of FBSD this is.
The kernel is compiled from 9.0-RC2 (releng/9.0 r227910) with gcc 4.2 that
comes with the OS. I cannot give you the 'uname -a' output now because I have
just compiled and installed a kernel with clang but I remembered it was updated
two days ago before I upgraded from stable/8 to releng/9.0. The CPU is an AMD
Athlon II 270u x2 running at 2 GHz.
I also tested it on a fortran code. Here is the runtime result:
0.923u /usr/local/path64/bin/pathf95 -O3 -LANG:copyinout=ON:recursive=ON
-OPT:goto=ON
1.283u gfortran46 -O3
I actually compiled gfortran with CLooG-PPL but the optimization flags from
GRAPHITE does not change the run time of this code.
Am I reading the result correctly that we're faster? You may also want to
add/test -ipa to your flags..
Yes, this code compiled from pathf95 runs faster than that compiled from
gfortran46. It may be more interesting to mention that I also have OpenIndiana
151a installed on the same computer and tested the code with Solaris Studio
12.2. The runtime for the same code compiled with Solaris Studio 12.2 is ~1.0xx
u. On OpenIndiana, I have only tested the optimization flags that do not
require SUNWprivate_1.5 version of libmtsk.so. All results are checked in those
run.
I will try -ipa later and let you know if it makes any difference in runtime.
(I think I have already tried that but let me do this again.)
I'll get you setup with EKOPath/Path64 on OI as well so you can check
that our performance is consistent across OS and your test environments
_______________________________________________
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"
