[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [RFC][Patch] Inline
[Top] [All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
--- Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This is ok.
Nothing to do with testing the releases. So far in your experience with Gcc
3.03, have you found it more stable/faster/smaller executables? Same goes for
2.4.18 kernel. In particular, I want to know if you've had any bad VM problems.
> > > - -fomit-frame-pointer or not
> > You used that? You didn't mention this before.
> I experimented with it. It showed a small increase.
Annoying. I was hoping using options other than -02 -inline -NDEBUG would show
noticeable increase in performance.
Any joy out of funroll-all-loops,-ffast-math ?
> > > > It would also be nice to have results for stock with -03 to compare
> > > > patch and -03.
> > >
> > > I don't have these numbers.
> > I was requesting those numbers.
> I do use you my computer today ;) Such usage _does_ (it shouldn't but
> it does) change the user time. This is also a reason why a nightly
> testing would be nice.
OK. Whenever it is doable.
> > It seems -03 is a fairly bad optimisation.
> There is just nothing more to squeeze.
> > 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 tests please?
> > With your patch and NDEBUG the speed increase is minor. Why?
> Note that I disabled CHECK_MAP_POS in all tests. NDEBUG will also
> disable CHECK_MAP_POS and so lead to an performance increase.
If I remeber correctly, Jason and you agreed CHECK_MAP_POS would eventually go.
Is that blessed day dawning ?
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