From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1RQg1c-0003UX-Oz for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 13:59:41 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4B29421C19A; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 13:59:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from svr-us4.tirtonadi.com (svr-us4.tirtonadi.com [69.65.43.212]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E5F521C031 for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 13:58:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-fx0-f53.google.com ([209.85.161.53]) by svr-us4.tirtonadi.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RQg0a-004J7G-EK for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 20:58:36 +0700 Received: by faan15 with SMTP id n15so1762301faa.40 for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 05:58:29 -0800 (PST) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.205.133.148 with SMTP id hy20mr21476194bkc.132.1321451909678; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 05:58:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.74.16 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 05:58:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.74.16 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 05:58:29 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <4EC2B642.3010500@gmail.com> <201111160811.17331.stephane@22decembre.eu> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 20:58:29 +0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Upgrading gcc: both 4.4 and 4.5 needed? From: Pandu Poluan To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015174783ecaa05c204b1da7f8c X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - svr-us4.tirtonadi.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.gentoo.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - poluan.info X-Archives-Salt: 9e7cefb5-2818-4f55-99cc-16669e853a65 X-Archives-Hash: b8fa4cf6dcdebbd9fe6f0154328bc470 --0015174783ecaa05c204b1da7f8c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Nov 16, 2011 2:26 PM, "Michael Mol" wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 2:11 AM, St=C3=A9phane Guedon wrote: > > On Wednesday 16 November 2011 02:07:12 Pandu Poluan wrote: > >> And if you're adventurous, add USE "graphite", reemerge gcc, and reemerge > >> world :) > > > > what does "graphite" add ? > > Thanks for reminding me; I meant to look it up when I got home. > > shortcircuit:1@serenity~ > Wed Nov 16 02:16 AM > !501 #1 j0 ?0 $ euse -i graphite > global use flags (searching: graphite) > ************************************************************ > no matching entries found > > local use flags (searching: graphite) > ************************************************************ > > [snip] > > [- ] graphite > sys-devel/gcc: Add support for the framework for loop optimizations > based on a polyhedral intermediate representation > > So, a new, experimental optimization model and framework inside your > compiler. If it's specifically for optimizing on loops, I'll venture a > guess it's going to be mostly effective for graphics libraries and > apps. I've got some slightly riskier educated guesses on how it works > and what some numeric side effects and consequences might be, but they > scare me, so I think I'll leave it to someone who actually knows more > about it... > I've been using USE "graphite" since gcc-4.5.3-r1 appeared. Upstream says that graphite is stable, feature-complete, and production-ready since 4.5.3= . To fully taste the effect of graphite, I even went the torturous route of emerging gcc + libtool + binutils (in that order) twice, followed by a wholesale-rebuild of everything (emerge --emptytree), then tarballed the result to my own "stage3.1" tarball to spare me the *huge* amount of time required. I've deployed 3 systems with USE "graphite", and they *felt* snappier. emerge's *felt* slower, though. (no objective tests, I know). I use Gentoo as a gatewall, and there I did a wholesale-rebuild one more time, this time specifying CFLAGS "-march=3Dnative"... and I just couldn't = be happier with the resulting performance :-) Rgds, Rgds, --0015174783ecaa05c204b1da7f8c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Nov 16, 2011 2:26 PM, "Michael Mol" <mikemol@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 2:11 AM, St=C3=A9phane Guedon <stephane@22decembre.eu> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 16 November 2011 02:07:12 Pandu Poluan wrote:
> >> And if you're adventurous, add USE "graphite", = reemerge gcc, and reemerge
> >> world :)
> >
> > what does "graphite" add ?
>
> Thanks for reminding me; I meant to look it up when I got home.
>
> shortcircuit:1@serenity~
> Wed Nov 16 02:16 AM
> !501 #1 j0 ?0 $ euse -i graphite
> global use flags (searching: graphite)
> ************************************************************
> no matching entries found
>
> local use flags (searching: graphite)
> ************************************************************
>
> [snip]
>
> [- =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0] graphite
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0sys-devel/gcc: Add support for the framework for loop opt= imizations
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0based on a polyhedral intermediate representation
>
> So, a new, experimental optimization model and framework inside your > compiler. If it's specifically for optimizing on loops, I'll v= enture a
> guess it's going to be mostly effective for graphics libraries and=
> apps. I've got some slightly riskier educated guesses on how it wo= rks
> and what some numeric side effects and consequences might be, but they=
> scare me, so I think I'll leave it to someone who actually knows m= ore
> about it...
>

I've been using USE "graphite" since gcc-4.5.3-r1 appeared= . Upstream says that graphite is stable, feature-complete, and production-r= eady since 4.5.3.

To fully taste the effect of graphite, I even went the torturous route o= f emerging gcc + libtool + binutils (in that order) twice, followed by a wh= olesale-rebuild of everything (emerge --emptytree), then tarballed the resu= lt to my own "stage3.1" tarball to spare me the *huge* amount of = time required.

I've deployed 3 systems with USE "graphite", and they *fel= t* snappier. emerge's *felt* slower, though. (no objective tests, I kno= w).

I use Gentoo as a gatewall, and there I did a wholesale-rebuild one more= time, this time specifying CFLAGS "-march=3Dnative"... and I jus= t couldn't be happier with the resulting performance :-)

Rgds,

Rgds,

--0015174783ecaa05c204b1da7f8c--