[4SALE] Core 2 Duo 2.13GHz, 4GB RAM, 2x250GB disks
For sale a Dell desktop: Core 2 Duo 2.13GHz 4GB RAM 2x250GB disks ATI 2400HD PCIe (dual screen capable) ILS 2,000 OBRO Marc Volovic m...@bard.org.il +972-54-467-6764 ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: New Freecell Solver gcc-4.5.0 vs. LLVM+clang Benchmark
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010, Shlomi Fish wrote about New Freecell Solver gcc-4.5.0 vs. LLVM+clang Benchmark: On the other hand, with gcc-4.5.0 with -flto and -fwhole-program Freecell Solver ran at 85.1303749084473 seconds. I admit that I ran the gcc benchmark with a good renice and only in the virtual console, while running the LLVM/clang benchmark without a renice and in KDE and Compiz, but it still cannot explain the dramatic difference. Two nitpicks: 1. Instead of admitting to not running the two benchmarks in the same conditions, can't you spare another 85 seconds (!) and run one of them again? 2. Do you really think that your measurements are accurate down to the individual picosecond? :-) Anyway, I guess that in any case it shows that gcc has nothing to be ashamed of. -- Nadav Har'El| Sunday, Jul 18 2010, 7 Av 5770 n...@math.technion.ac.il |- Phone +972-523-790466, ICQ 13349191 |In Fortran, God is real unless declared http://nadav.harel.org.il |an integer. ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: [Haifux] [HAIFUX LECTURE] Valgrind - from magic to science - Shachar Raindel
Hello Avid Haifuxers, Shachar's talk is postponed to Monday, July 26th, 18:30 (same place and hour, next week) due to July 19th being 9th of Av. There will be no Haifux talk tomorrow (July 19th). Thanks Orna On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Orr Dunkelman orr.dunkel...@gmail.comwrote: Next Monday, July 19th at 18:30, Haifux will gather to hear Shachar Raindel talk about: Valgrind - from magic to science Valgrind is an extremely powerful development tool, which detects and pin-points many common programming errors when running a program. Some examples for the problems it handles are many kinds of buffer overflows, using uninitialized data, accessing freed memory and memory leaks. Valgrind does that without need for recompilation of the program, simply by adding valgrind to the beginning of the command line. To an outside observer, this could seem like magic. In this lecture, we will take a peek under the hood of valgrind, and learn how the magic is done. I will also briefly introduce other, less known features of valgrind. == We meet in Taub (CS Faculty) building, room 6. For instructions see: http://www.haifux.org/where.html Attendance is free, and you are all invited! == Future talks include: 02/08/10 Zemereshet - Yair Even-Zohar Gaps for YOU to fill... including Haifux's 11th birthday!!! 13/09/10 Secure File Systems - Orr Dunkelman === We are always interested in hearing your talks and ideas. If you wish to give a talk, hold a discussion, or just plan some event haifux might be interested in, please contact us at webmas...@haifux.org -- Orr Dunkelman, orr.dunkel...@gmail.com GPG fingerprint: C2D5 C6D6 9A24 9A95 C5B3 2023 6CAB 4A7C B73F D0AA (This key will never sign Emails, only other PGP keys. The key corresponds to o...@vipe.technion.ac.il) ___ Haifux mailing list hai...@haifux.org http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux -- Orna Agmon Ben-Yehuda. http://ladypine.org ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: New Freecell Solver gcc-4.5.0 vs. LLVM+clang Benchmark
Hi Nadav, On Sunday 18 Jul 2010 10:03:32 Nadav Har'El wrote: On Sat, Jul 17, 2010, Shlomi Fish wrote about New Freecell Solver gcc-4.5.0 vs. LLVM+clang Benchmark: On the other hand, with gcc-4.5.0 with -flto and -fwhole-program Freecell Solver ran at 85.1303749084473 seconds. I admit that I ran the gcc benchmark with a good renice and only in the virtual console, while running the LLVM/clang benchmark without a renice and in KDE and Compiz, but it still cannot explain the dramatic difference. Two nitpicks: 1. Instead of admitting to not running the two benchmarks in the same conditions, can't you spare another 85 seconds (!) and run one of them again? Yes, I can. I'm on to it, which will take a little longer because I've deleted the svn checkout of LLVM today before I read your E-mail. 2. Do you really think that your measurements are accurate down to the individual picosecond? :-) No, I don't. But that's what I copy and paste from my timing program which is using gettimeofday() and that's what I get after being processed with a Perl script. Anyway, I guess that in any case it shows that gcc has nothing to be ashamed of. Well, at least not in comparison to clang and LLVM. Reportedly, gcc does not yield as good results as, say, Intel's icc. (But see: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/12/1320202tid=142tid=118tid=123 ). Regards, Shlomi Fish -- - Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ Stop Using MSIE - http://www.shlomifish.org/no-ie/ God considered inflicting XSLT as the tenth plague of Egypt, but then decided against it because he thought it would be too evil. Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply . ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Open Position in Motorola-BitBand - Platform
Position 3100: Software System Integrator Job Description: Responsible for the integration of Bitband's Software solution. The job includes development of Bitband Linux platform, Software integration with hardware components, source control, creation of builds, integration testing, installation kit preparation and maintenance of the team's lab. Job qualifications: * 3 years Experience as Linux system administrator * Excellent scripting capabilities in Bash, Perl, Python and regular expressions * Knowledge in Servers Hardware * Knowledge in Networking * Knowledge in storage and specifically raid controllers * Excellent teamwork and interpersonal skills The following constitute an Advantage: * B.Sc. in Eng/Computer Science from a known university * Experience with Data Bases * Experience with J2EE application servers * Experience with RedHat/CentOS distribution raz ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: New Freecell Solver gcc-4.5.0 vs. LLVM+clang Benchmark
While you're on to it. I expect to read in a benchmark report, the number of time the software was executed, the mean running time, and the standard deviation. Running and timing it once can hide a pretty large error. On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Shlomi Fish shlo...@iglu.org.il wrote: Hi Nadav, On Sunday 18 Jul 2010 10:03:32 Nadav Har'El wrote: On Sat, Jul 17, 2010, Shlomi Fish wrote about New Freecell Solver gcc-4.5.0 vs. LLVM+clang Benchmark: On the other hand, with gcc-4.5.0 with -flto and -fwhole-program Freecell Solver ran at 85.1303749084473 seconds. I admit that I ran the gcc benchmark with a good renice and only in the virtual console, while running the LLVM/clang benchmark without a renice and in KDE and Compiz, but it still cannot explain the dramatic difference. Two nitpicks: 1. Instead of admitting to not running the two benchmarks in the same conditions, can't you spare another 85 seconds (!) and run one of them again? Yes, I can. I'm on to it, which will take a little longer because I've deleted the svn checkout of LLVM today before I read your E-mail. 2. Do you really think that your measurements are accurate down to the individual picosecond? :-) No, I don't. But that's what I copy and paste from my timing program which is using gettimeofday() and that's what I get after being processed with a Perl script. Anyway, I guess that in any case it shows that gcc has nothing to be ashamed of. Well, at least not in comparison to clang and LLVM. Reportedly, gcc does not yield as good results as, say, Intel's icc. (But see: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/12/1320202tid=142tid=118tid=123 ). Regards, Shlomi Fish -- - Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ Stop Using MSIE - http://www.shlomifish.org/no-ie/ God considered inflicting XSLT as the tenth plague of Egypt, but then decided against it because he thought it would be too evil. Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply . ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
NO HAIFUX LECTURE TOMORROW (July 19th): Valgrind Lecture postponed
Hello all, I know this was just announced, but not loud enough, in my opinion, for this short notice: Shachar's talk is postponed to Monday, July 26th, 18:30 (same place and hour, next week) due to July 19th being 9th of Av. There will be no Haifux talk tomorrow (July 19th). Eli -- Web: http://www.billauer.co.il ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
[4SALE] iMac 17 1.83GHz C2D, 1GB RAM, 160GB disk
And... to make matters worse - For sale an iMac 17: Core 2 Duo 1.83GHz 1GB RAM 160GB disk Mac OS X 10.5.8 ILS 1,500 OBRO Marc Volovic marcvolo...@me.com ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: New Freecell Solver gcc-4.5.0 vs. LLVM+clang Benchmark
On Sunday 18 Jul 2010 11:37:17 Shlomi Fish wrote: Hi Nadav, On Sunday 18 Jul 2010 10:03:32 Nadav Har'El wrote: On Sat, Jul 17, 2010, Shlomi Fish wrote about New Freecell Solver gcc-4.5.0 vs. LLVM+clang Benchmark: On the other hand, with gcc-4.5.0 with -flto and -fwhole-program Freecell Solver ran at 85.1303749084473 seconds. I admit that I ran the gcc benchmark with a good renice and only in the virtual console, while running the LLVM/clang benchmark without a renice and in KDE and Compiz, but it still cannot explain the dramatic difference. Two nitpicks: 1. Instead of admitting to not running the two benchmarks in the same conditions, can't you spare another 85 seconds (!) and run one of them again? Yes, I can. I'm on to it, which will take a little longer because I've deleted the svn checkout of LLVM today before I read your E-mail. OK, ran it now and I got: shlomi[fcs]:$trunk/fc-solve/source$ perl scripts/time-fcs.pl llvm*DUMPS/* llvm-2-DUMPS/dump002:95.6706857681274 llvm-3-DUMPS/dump002:95.6713609695435 llvm-DUMPS/dump002:96.0500059127808 shlomi[fcs]:$trunk/fc-solve/source$ So the lowest run when running it in a virtual console without X running, and while renicing it to the highest priority, makes it run at 95.67 seconds, vs. gcc's 85.13 seconds. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- - Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/ways_to_do_it.html God considered inflicting XSLT as the tenth plague of Egypt, but then decided against it because he thought it would be too evil. Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply . ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: New Freecell Solver gcc-4.5.0 vs. LLVM+clang Benchmark
On Sunday 18 Jul 2010 11:56:33 Elazar Leibovich wrote: While you're on to it. I expect to read in a benchmark report, the number of time the software was executed, the mean running time, and the standard deviation. Running and timing it once can hide a pretty large error. Perhaps you're right about that for more complex software. But for Freecell Solver, I noticed that running it on the virtual console without X running and while renicing it to the maximal possible priority, yields about the same runtime every time. This maybe because it is almost purely CPU/memory bound and does not use the disk much. I'm also more interested in the minimal running time than I am in the mean one. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- - Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ Humanity - Parody of Modern Life - http://shlom.in/humanity God considered inflicting XSLT as the tenth plague of Egypt, but then decided against it because he thought it would be too evil. Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply . ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: New Freecell Solver gcc-4.5.0 vs. LLVM+clang Benchmark
The standard deviation can give you an estimation of the minimal running time. (99. of the samples are within X standard deviations below the average. Pick a high enough relative to the number of times you'll run the software, and you'll get an estimation of the minimum running time you'll get). The scalar representing the minimum running time have the obnoxious mis-feature that it doesn't tend to a certain value. So with a small probability you can sample your input today 1m times, and tomorrow yet another 1m times, but still get very different results because of a very rare event. The probability this would happen with the mean or the standard deviation is much much much lower. But I know almost nothing about statistical analysis, so don't take my word for it, and I'll be glad to hear any corrections. On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Shlomi Fish shlo...@iglu.org.il wrote: On Sunday 18 Jul 2010 11:56:33 Elazar Leibovich wrote: While you're on to it. I expect to read in a benchmark report, the number of time the software was executed, the mean running time, and the standard deviation. Running and timing it once can hide a pretty large error. Perhaps you're right about that for more complex software. But for Freecell Solver, I noticed that running it on the virtual console without X running and while renicing it to the maximal possible priority, yields about the same runtime every time. This maybe because it is almost purely CPU/memory bound and does not use the disk much. I'm also more interested in the minimal running time than I am in the mean one. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- - Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ Humanity - Parody of Modern Life - http://shlom.in/humanity God considered inflicting XSLT as the tenth plague of Egypt, but then decided against it because he thought it would be too evil. Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply . ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
