Fixed, but it wasn't actually the problem. For some reason Module.calledRun was true, so Module.run() did nothing. Setting it now manually false before the run. To the original problem: The -g1 version works now (index_alon.html), without asm.js errors but is ~100 times slower. I guess this is no use in determining why the speed loss occurred. Should I compile with -O2 and -g1 ?
Thanks, Christian On Tuesday, February 11, 2014 7:32:03 PM UTC+1, Alon Zakai wrote: > > I believe FS.unlink is what does that. > > - Alon > > > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 12:55 AM, Christian H <[email protected]<javascript:> > > wrote: > >> ...just noticed that chrome does complain about FS.deleteFile() not >> found? How do I remove a file now? >> >> Cheers, >> C >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Christian H <[email protected]<javascript:> >> > wrote: >> >>> Hi Alon, >>> I did recompile with the latest emscripten, the one I compiled with was >>> not more than 2 months old. However, now I get nothing. I do see the asm.js >>> warnings, but no reaction to Module.run(), also no error (even within >>> worker triggering manually), the FS works, Module.print() works too. That >>> happens to all versions I compiled with -O2 or -g1. I prepared a site >>> loading the new (-g1) version: >>> >>> http://gaia.respawned.com/index_alon.html >>> >>> The bitcode is at >>> http://gaia.respawned.com/GaiaE.o >>> >>> You don't need to wait that long, it will run until TS 1000. The >>> performance line appears after TS 0. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Christian >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:17 PM, Alon Zakai <[email protected]<javascript:> >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks. How long should this run? I waited until TS: 100 and it still >>>> keeps going it seems. >>>> >>>> I see an asm.js validation error in the log, this could be related to >>>> the performance problem. Was this compiled using latest emscripten? If so, >>>> can you make a whitespace-friendly build I could take a look at? emcc -g1 >>>> will do that. (Even better is if you can provide the bitcode file, but not >>>> necessary.) >>>> >>>> - Alon >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Chris <[email protected] <javascript:> >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> Yes - you have to switch to the "Run"tab first. That is where the CFD >>>>> sim task is controlled, the gnuplot tasks may/should suffer from the same >>>>> problem. >>>>> The GFlops output comes after the first time step. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> C >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Monday, February 10, 2014 7:21:07 PM UTC+1, Alon Zakai wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Does it print out the GFlops somewhere? >>>>>> >>>>>> All I see is "Execution took", which went from 1.628 to 2.172 when I >>>>>> reset. >>>>>> >>>>>> - Alon >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 3:04 AM, Chris <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>> I ported a fluid simulation C++ code (command line program) with >>>>>>> emscripten and it works quite fantastic. I never thought JS could run >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> efficiently. >>>>>>> However, to re-run my program I wrapped the compiled version in a >>>>>>> function (with pre/post.js) to reset its state. That usually worked >>>>>>> nice, >>>>>>> but recently I get at first an awesome performance from FF (~0.3 native >>>>>>> speed!), but after a reset it suffers a drastic performance breakdown >>>>>>> of a >>>>>>> factor of 20. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The site is http://gaia.respawned.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You can observe it just by clicking "Run" in the Run tab, the sparse >>>>>>> matrix mul+add performance is measured thoroughly. At first run: >>>>>>> Performance (mul+add): 0.377445 GFlops >>>>>>> >>>>>>> After "Reset" (calling gaia_create() again in the worker): >>>>>>> Performance (mul+add): 0.0187213 GFlops >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On a recent Chrome I do not get a difference, always around 0.26 >>>>>>> GFlops. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for your help, >>>>>>> Christian >>>>>>> >>>>>>> PS: Native gcc -O3 : 1.17 GFlops. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "emscripten-discuss" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "emscripten-discuss" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to [email protected]<javascript:> >>>>> . >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >>>> Google Groups "emscripten-discuss" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/emscripten-discuss/UFL7YRfvJQw/unsubscribe >>>> . >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >>>> [email protected] <javascript:>. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>>> >>> >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "emscripten-discuss" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected] <javascript:>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "emscripten-discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
