| Re: [eigen] CDASH-Speedup: "Homer" how did you do it? |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] CDASH-Speedup: "Homer" how did you do it?
- From: Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 17:28:00 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=sS/9zVj/JBF1nlwadb8TRDzpkRcEDSXwRF2wnF5aZGU=; b=s4sDt3dtWsU0WqTqKByOYdoBZT5HP6GQfUSn7FPhmoxnQdfle965uSl1+kFRauusbe r26lmvT4U2LHMPWvL2T93HBqxucuA0ENsCeYbDy/xbk4ZAyw4xkwxl/EOZOxxCLwrJHR Hxhi+pKaYCFXFqvDpIc6pLDNfVDYL/8ZS66vg=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=O+KTi/LxwJLqa78zoR0LKo+fiv6k3lKoi8Gl2hSR2LN5YbBA/h1d/sJFb793F4GpTc ptecbWCgcmTcLce/N69Ur1brHvbB38/ihpRr9v1wUx5klqZkdub+JI50YZVxrbxz9brc L21JwcHy11xjYT+iv22RqRWX3IoW7XX7GW32o=
2009/8/29 FMDSPAM <fmdspam@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Hauke Heibel schrieb:
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM, FMDSPAM<fmdspam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Is it possible to change the compiler settings at the outermost level,
>>> the
>>> calling batch?
>>>
>>
>> Probably, but see my comments below.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> All my experiments (even with EI_OFLAGS=...) fail.
>>>
>>
>> What do you mean? Are you saying that since my last commit all your
>> experiments are failing?
>>
>>
>
> No, 2 or 3 experimtes several weeks ago.
>>>
>>> A preferable result could be something in the (batch-)lines of e.g.:
>>>
>>> set CXX_VERSION=msvc-2008(9.0.30729.1)
>>> set CXX_FLAGS=/Ox
>>> set BUILD_STRING=%OS_VERSION%-%ARCH%-%CXX_VERSION%-%CXX_FLAGS%
>>>
>>>
>>> what do you think?
>>>
>>
>> I am not sure whether this is necessary. O2 should definitely suffice.
>>
>
> Hmm..., probably. But in theory maybe other flags...
>>
>> Btw, my test could also be so fast because quite a few are actually
>> failing. :)
>>
>
> That is not the case. E.g.:
> product_large.exe: yours 5.25s, my 52.73s
> product_trmm.exe: yours 24.76s, my 163.86s
>
> By the way: The timings could vary simply caused by the random numbers,
> right? Or is there a fixed random seed?
> What is the expected bandwidth of variation by this?
Yes, indeed the matrix sizes are random numbers between 1 and 320.
to use a fixed seed, do:
test/test_product_large s12345
get help:
test/test_product_large help
(or whatever string in place of "help")
Benoit