Re: Suggested tune/tuneup.c patch
Ciao, Il 2021-11-01 01:04 Torbjörn Granlund ha scritto: Marco Bodrato writes: fac_ui... and I find an empty page if I look at https://gmplib.org/devel/thres/2021-10-30/FAC_ODD_THRESHOLD Still there, but for some reason nginx had stopped serving gz pages, and there were no non-gzip pages on the server. I made a quick workaround. And the workaround works. Thanks! Ĝis, m ___ gmp-devel mailing list gmp-devel@gmplib.org https://gmplib.org/mailman/listinfo/gmp-devel
Re: Suggested tune/tuneup.c patch
Marco Bodrato writes: Is this still active? I can access https://gmplib.org/devel/thres/2021-10-30/ , but I'd like to check how FAC_ODD_THRESHOLD evolves after my last commit to fac_ui... and I find an empty page if I look at https://gmplib.org/devel/thres/2021-10-30/FAC_ODD_THRESHOLD Still there, but for some reason nginx had stopped serving gz pages, and there were no non-gzip pages on the server. I made a quick workaround. -- Torbjörn Please encrypt, key id 0xC8601622 ___ gmp-devel mailing list gmp-devel@gmplib.org https://gmplib.org/mailman/listinfo/gmp-devel
Re: Suggested tune/tuneup.c patch
Ciao, Il 2019-09-11 19:37 t...@gmplib.org ha scritto: I added a history preservation feature to the .../devel/thres/ pages. At 23:59 each night, all pages are copied to .../devel/thres/-MM-DD. (There is no index, one needs to type in the wanted date manually.) Is this still active? I can access https://gmplib.org/devel/thres/2021-10-30/ , but I'd like to check how FAC_ODD_THRESHOLD evolves after my last commit to fac_ui... and I find an empty page if I look at https://gmplib.org/devel/thres/2021-10-30/FAC_ODD_THRESHOLD Ĝis, m ___ gmp-devel mailing list gmp-devel@gmplib.org https://gmplib.org/mailman/listinfo/gmp-devel
Re: Suggested tune/tuneup.c patch
t...@gmplib.org (Torbjörn Granlund) writes: > ni...@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) writes: > > Below patch adds a helper function for tuning *_METHOD values, > evaluated at some fix size. What do you think? > > It helps with some function comments, outlining what a function does, > and what its arguments mean. > > Please consider adding that before committing. Done and pushed. > And please take a screenshot of the affected parameters before and > after this change, as a sanity check. Looks reasonable to me: Before: size=1, mpn_hgcd2_1 0.01154 size=1, mpn_hgcd2_2 0.01552 size=1, mpn_hgcd2_3 0.01138 #define HGCD2_METHOD ... #define HGCD2_METHOD 3 /* 1.38% faster than 1 */ After: size=1, mpn_hgcd2, method 1 0.01160 size=1, mpn_hgcd2, method 2 0.01548 size=1, mpn_hgcd2, method 3 0.01146 #define HGCD2_METHOD ... #define HGCD2_METHOD 3 /* 1.20% faster than 1 */ I only get this _METHOD and JACOBI_BASE_METHOD on my machine, though. DIV_QR_1N_PI1_METHOD and MOD_1_1P_METHOD which also use the new helper are both skipped. Regards, /Niels -- Niels Möller. PGP-encrypted email is preferred. Keyid 368C6677. Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance. ___ gmp-devel mailing list gmp-devel@gmplib.org https://gmplib.org/mailman/listinfo/gmp-devel
Re: Suggested tune/tuneup.c patch
And please take a screenshot of the affected parameters before and after this change, as a sanity check. I added a history preservation feature to the .../devel/thres/ pages. At 23:59 each night, all pages are copied to .../devel/thres/-MM-DD. (There is no index, one needs to type in the wanted date manually.) -- Torbjörn Please encrypt, key id 0xC8601622 ___ gmp-devel mailing list gmp-devel@gmplib.org https://gmplib.org/mailman/listinfo/gmp-devel
Re: Suggested tune/tuneup.c patch
ni...@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) writes: Below patch adds a helper function for tuning *_METHOD values, evaluated at some fix size. What do you think? It helps with some function comments, outlining what a function does, and what its arguments mean. Please consider adding that before committing. And please take a screenshot of the affected parameters before and after this change, as a sanity check. -- Torbjörn Please encrypt, key id 0xC8601622 ___ gmp-devel mailing list gmp-devel@gmplib.org https://gmplib.org/mailman/listinfo/gmp-devel
Suggested tune/tuneup.c patch
Below patch adds a helper function for tuning *_METHOD values,
evaluated at some fix size. What do you think?
Regards,
/Niels
diff -r ed6ddbb7a15b tune/tuneup.c
--- a/tune/tuneup.c Tue Sep 10 00:00:35 2019 +0200
+++ b/tune/tuneup.c Tue Sep 10 21:29:34 2019 +0200
@@ -519,8 +519,8 @@
}
void
-print_define_with_margin (const char *name, mp_size_t value,
- mp_size_t runner_up, double speedup)
+print_define_with_speedup (const char *name, mp_size_t value,
+ mp_size_t runner_up, double speedup)
{
char buf[100];
snprintf (buf, sizeof(buf), "%.2f%% faster than %ld",
@@ -712,6 +712,48 @@
print_define_end (param->name, *threshold);
}
+void
+one_method (int n, speed_function_t *functions,
+ const char *name, const char *define,
+ const struct param_t *param)
+{
+ double *t;
+ int i;
+ int method;
+ int method_runner_up;
+
+ TMP_DECL;
+ TMP_MARK;
+ t = TMP_ALLOC (n * sizeof (*t));
+
+ for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
+{
+ t[i] = tuneup_measure (functions[i], param, );
+ if (option_trace >= 1)
+ printf ("size=%ld, %s, method %d %.9f\n",
+ (long) s.size, name, i + 1, t[i]);
+ if (t[i] == -1.0)
+ {
+ printf ("Oops, can't measure all %s methods\n", name);
+ abort ();
+ }
+}
+ method = 0;
+ for (i = 1; i < n; i++)
+if (t[i] < t[method])
+ method = i;
+
+ method_runner_up = (method == 0);
+ for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
+if (i != method && t[i] < t[method_runner_up])
+ method_runner_up = i;
+
+ print_define_with_speedup (define, method + 1, method_runner_up + 1,
+t[method_runner_up] / t[method]);
+
+ TMP_FREE;
+}
+
/* Special probing for the fft thresholds. The size restrictions on the
FFTs mean the graph of time vs size has a step effect. See this for
@@ -1911,47 +1953,15 @@
tune_hgcd2 (void)
{
static struct param_t param;
- double t[3+1];
- int method;
- int runner_up_method;
- double runner_up_ratio;
+ speed_function_t f[3] =
+{
+ speed_mpn_hgcd2_1,
+ speed_mpn_hgcd2_2,
+ speed_mpn_hgcd2_3,
+};
s.size = 1;
- t[1] = tuneup_measure (speed_mpn_hgcd2_1, , );
- if (option_trace >= 1)
-printf ("size=%ld, mpn_hgcd2_1 %.9f\n", (long) s.size, t[1]);
-
- t[2] = tuneup_measure (speed_mpn_hgcd2_2, , );
- if (option_trace >= 1)
-printf ("size=%ld, mpn_hgcd2_2 %.9f\n", (long) s.size, t[2]);
-
- t[3] = tuneup_measure (speed_mpn_hgcd2_3, , );
- if (option_trace >= 1)
-printf ("size=%ld, mpn_hgcd2_3 %.9f\n", (long) s.size, t[3]);
-
- if (t[1] == -1.0 || t[2] == -1.0 || t[3] == -1.0)
-{
- printf ("Oops, can't measure all mpn_hgcd2 methods\n");
- abort ();
-}
-
- if (t[1] < t[2] && t[1] < t[3])
-{
- method = 1;
- runner_up_method = (t[2] < t[3]) ? 2 : 3;
-}
- else if (t[2] < t[3])
-{
- method = 2;
- runner_up_method = (t[1] < t[3]) ? 1 : 3;
-}
- else
-{
- method = 3;
- runner_up_method = (t[1] < t[2]) ? 1 : 2;
-}
- print_define_with_margin ("HGCD2_METHOD", method, runner_up_method,
- t[runner_up_method] / t[method]);
+ one_method (3, f, "mpn_hgcd2", "HGCD2_METHOD", );
}
void
@@ -2227,22 +2237,16 @@
if (!HAVE_NATIVE_mpn_div_qr_1n_pi1)
{
static struct param_t param;
- double t1, t2;
+ speed_function_t f[2] =
+ {
+speed_mpn_div_qr_1n_pi1_1,
+speed_mpn_div_qr_1n_pi1_2,
+ };
s.size = 10;
s.r = randlimb_norm ();
- t1 = tuneup_measure (speed_mpn_div_qr_1n_pi1_1, , );
- t2 = tuneup_measure (speed_mpn_div_qr_1n_pi1_2, , );
-
- if (t1 == -1.0 || t2 == -1.0)
- {
- printf ("Oops, can't measure all mpn_div_qr_1n_pi1 methods at %ld\n",
- (long) s.size);
- abort ();
- }
- div_qr_1n_pi1_method = (t1 < t2) ? 1 : 2;
- print_define ("DIV_QR_1N_PI1_METHOD", div_qr_1n_pi1_method);
+ one_method (2, f, "mpn_div_qr_1n_pi1", "DIV_QR_1N_PI1_METHOD", );
}
{
@@ -2289,22 +2293,15 @@
if (!HAVE_NATIVE_mpn_mod_1_1p)
{
static struct param_t param;
- double t1, t2;
+ speed_function_t f[2] =
+ {
+speed_mpn_mod_1_1_1,
+speed_mpn_mod_1_1_2,
+ };
s.size = 10;
s.r = randlimb_half ();
-
- t1 = tuneup_measure (speed_mpn_mod_1_1_1, , );
- t2 = tuneup_measure (speed_mpn_mod_1_1_2, , );
-
- if (t1 == -1.0 || t2 == -1.0)
- {
- printf ("Oops, can't measure all mpn_mod_1_1 methods at %ld\n",
- (long) s.size);
- abort ();
- }
- mod_1_1p_method = (t1 < t2) ? 1 : 2;
- print_define ("MOD_1_1P_METHOD", mod_1_1p_method);
+ one_method (2, f, "mpn_mod_1_1", "MOD_1_1P_METHOD", );
}
if (UDIV_PREINV_ALWAYS)
@@ -2680,44 +2677,17 @@
tune_jacobi_base (void)
{
static struct param_t param;
-
