Re: Optimizations.

From: Alexander Leidinger (Alexander_at_Leidinger.net)
Date: 05/15/03

  • Next message: Marcel Moolenaar: "Re: Optimizations."
    Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 16:45:44 +0200
    To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
    
    

    On Thu, 15 May 2003 14:30:33 +0200
    Pawel Jakub Dawidek <nick@garage.freebsd.pl> wrote:

    > IMHO optimization in FreeBSD's code has too low priority.
    > Maybe is time to think about some 'optimiztion team' creation?

    The actual goal is to finish the "SMPng"-feature (and other new 5.x
    technologie). After that the "roadmap" (there's no official one, but if
    you read -current you read sometimes about what is written on the TODO
    lists) says something about optimizing those features. You know,
    premature optimization is evil, do you?

    > value is. They should have experience in old-school optimization (there are
    > many places where '* (2^n)' could be changed to '<< n' and many places where

    Are you sure? Compare the produced code, if the value is known to be a
    power of 2 at compile time, this optimization gets already performed by
    the compiler. Regardless of the fact that todays compilers already do a
    good job with such easy optimizations, not every place where you could
    improve the produced code is worth to improve in such a way (if you
    improve the code by 1ms but the complete "action" takes 1000ms it isn't
    worth... and optimizing algorithms gives you most of the time much more
    bang for the bucks...). Personally I prefer readability of the algorithm
    instead of speed in such situations.

    The actual performance difference between gcc and icc doesn't comes from
    such optimizations, its from using SIMD code and from scheduling the
    instructions in a different way (on a P4 you get huge benefits from
    this), so the time is better spend on improving those aspects of gcc
    instead.

    Bye,
    Alexander.

    -- 
         The three Rs of Microsoft support: Retry, Reboot, Reinstall.
    http://www.Leidinger.net                       Alexander @ Leidinger.net
      GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91  3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7
    _______________________________________________
    freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
    http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
    To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
    

  • Next message: Marcel Moolenaar: "Re: Optimizations."

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: [SLE] Goodbye SuSE :-(
      ... optimizing things in source or compile time. ... When I got the Athlon I wiped ... to be much difference between my LFS system and SuSE. ...
      (SuSE)
    • Re: Generating code which compiles to a jmphash
      ... (loop for i from 0 to 4 ... common data structures that are heavily used or require a great ... optimizing what you think may be the problem rarely gives ...
      (comp.lang.lisp)
    • Re: Optimizations.
      ... lists) says something about optimizing those features. ... power of 2 at compile time, this optimization gets already performed by ... and optimizing algorithms gives you most of the time much more ... The actual performance difference between gcc and icc doesn't comes from ...
      (freebsd-hackers)
    • Re: linux/gui programming, getting started
      ... Måns> language was capable of doing anything above a basic ... Måns> compile, such as optimizing well. ... If I were to write an optimizing C compiler, ...
      (comp.os.linux.development.apps)
    • Re: Strange instructions in compiler output
      ... Try optimizing and see what the code looks like. ... I just compile it ... and use gdb to disassemble main to get this assembly. ... it possible I can get the non-redundent output? ...
      (freebsd-hackers)