Greetings! Please excuse my silence of late as I've tried to catch up on work that had accumulated during my vacation.
Robert Boyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It looks like an icc-9 version of GCL is about 9% faster than a gcc version > on the Nqthm tests under GCL 2.7.0. > > ICC > > run-gbc time : 2362.520 secs > child run time : 115.530 secs > gbc time : 97.970 secs > > GCC > > run-gbc time : 2447.650 secs > child run time : 156.270 secs > gbc time : 215.780 secs > > (/ (+ 2447.6 156.2 215.8) (+ 2362.5 115.5 98)) = 1.094 Thank you for these very interesting results! 1) I'd very much be interested in the icc compiler warning output that bounced in the mail -- perhaps you can tell me where to retrieve! 2) Of course the lion's chare of the improvement is in gc time, and I bet I know exactly where -- sweeping the relocatable area. I'd wager icc uses sse and prefetch instructions to do the copy much faster. Thankfully, we can get the same using pure open source tools. gcc-4.0 now spits out sse, and even without it we can make use of atlas tuned blas copy routines. You can confirm/refute in part by doing objjdump -d gbc.o | grep xmm 3) I'd love to see a breakdown preferably by routine of the run-gbc time improvements. I don't suppose icc speaks gprof? Take care, > > Bob > > > -- Camm Maguire [EMAIL PROTECTED] ========================================================================== "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah _______________________________________________ Gcl-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel
