[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [RFC][Patch] Inline
[Top] [All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
> > 2.) gcc version
I've only got 2.96. Should I d/l 3.03 to make it strictly comparable, or is
using my version ok?
> > 4.) CVS version
> The one from yesterday.
March 20 it is.
> 6.) Compile flags. The easiest solution would IMHO be if the patch
> creates a file freeciv/make_options which the script passed to
> make. Since these can be a lot:
> - -O2 vs -O3
> - -DUSE_INLINE or not
> - -fomit-frame-pointer or not
You used that? You didn't mention this before.
> - -DNDEBUG or not
> 7.) Enable profiling. Passed -pg to gcc and runs gprof later. Archive
> the result.
> > > Results:
> > > stock: 62.15s
> > > with this patch and no inlining: 80.97s (difference because of
> > > converting map_inx, dirstep,.. to functions)
> > > with this patch and inlining: 40.46s
> > > with this patch and inlining and NDEBUG: 36.83s
> > > with this patch and inlining and -O3: 39.48s
> > >
> > I seem to spot a missing
> > with this patch and inlining and -O3 and NDEBUG:
> > It would also be nice to have results for stock with -03 to compare with
> > patch and -03.
> I don't have these numbers.
I was requesting those numbers. It seems -03 is a fairly bad optimisation.
Jason ran some tests on the stock freeciv, and he seemed to get large increases
in performance just by using NDEBUG. Jason, some comments on your previous
With your patch and NDEBUG the speed increase is minor. Why?
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards®
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [RFC][Patch] Inline, Jason Short, 2002/03/21
[Freeciv-Dev] a civserver patch testing framework (was: [RFC][Patch] Inline), Reinier Post, 2002/03/21