On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 09:50:41PM +0200, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> [...]
>
> I tested earmhf vs earmv7hf on the beaglebone black. with glxgears,
> the performance improvement is less than 1%.
>
> Do you have other tests that show a large gain with earmv7hf vs earmhf ?
> For 1% I don't think we should bother providing all of
> earmhf, earmv6hf and earmv7hf.
I rebuilt a distribution; this time with
build.sh -m evbarm -a earmv7hf -V "CPUFLAGS=-mcpu=cortex-a8 -mtune=cortex-a8
-mfpu=neon -funsafe-math-optimizations"
Now glxgears shows a real improvement over earmhf;
from about 24.8FPS to 25.8FPS (this would be about 4%).
But we probably don't want to provide evbarm binaries with such CPU-specific
compilation options (-funsafe-math-optimizations may also be a problem for
some use case).
--
Manuel Bouyer <bou...@antioche.eu.org>
NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--
