| Re: [eigen] new eigen2 release (2.0.12) runs slower than 2.0.0 ? |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] new eigen2 release (2.0.12) runs slower than 2.0.0 ?
- From: Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 22:03:28 -0500
- 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=RCsxBx186AzVHg9qo5eHv04RCUdTyQhPfcVqalDpB/4=; b=Cqpiv3V2Q5/U/FbRE5romgc2kRsfUc6iKikVULlYhX+Q7W8Y4giKpj4iCmKiniEVPT +CYinrxM72hdHmXmCSRFIpntsmwzcuwpixrcYNaDYmEZlDz2dntbgbx3NWIj67SoEpUH jCTFmURqqSK5SJ2q1je9q1LFdaXkyanAcZtdY=
- 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=SDTuzzUnjJrqtXolEkr0ErVZddOhbHkWE7fw9vod6EUIxdC7vCNATPtaD35QvtavJc H/UZwTnR++Ej1+zPu0dTqSP16OyuC2YoZqTvrxLSwv+FNjnXU8WpovfCWEJxY0OvdcOT dQjFzjtmjsPbdnptsZzRfpKJuYU3fahgaLJz4=
There is one area where we have consciously introduced a performance
regression between 2.0.0 and 2.0.12: inversion of 4x4 matrices with
numeric types different from float. (We have changed the algorithm
used to be safer, and have only added a SSE version in the float
case).
Benoit
2010/3/1 Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Hi Leon,
>
> So far, we haven't been doing any serious testing for performance
> regressions. It's just that the commits that we allow into the 2.0
> branch are, in principle, very safe.
>
> The online benchmarks refer to the development branch (though at that
> time it wasn't much different from 2.0.0).
>
> What you report sounds very interesting but we indeed need more
> details in order to do anything about it. Ideally, if you could
> produce a self-contained, compilable benchmark...
>
> Here are some ideas.
>
> First let's check for potentially stupid compiler optimizations:
> - what happens if you remove -ffast-math?
> - what happens if you replace -O3 by -O2 ?
>
> Is it 32bit or 64bit code?
>
> If you disable vectorization (EIGEN_DONT_VECTORIZE) on both sides, how
> does performance compare?
>
> Benoit
>
>
> 2010/3/1 leon zadorin <leonleon77@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> Hi all -- just a generic question w.r.t. benchmarking being done to
>> compare older vs newer eigen2 releases to see if, inadvertently, there
>> are performance-related regressions...
>>
>> I have noticed that v 2.0.12 appears to have slowed down in comparison
>> to 2.0.0_1 ...
>>
>> Currently, it's too time-consuming for me to unwind the code for a
>> particular bottleneck -- I have simply noticed that a complex function
>> (log-likelihood calculations made up from large dynamic matricies of
>> mainly column-major layout with some exp, cwise, select, etc. calls)
>> are taking ~3.4 seconds to calculate with 2.0.12 whilst taking ~3.1
>> seconds with the 2.0.0 (exactly same app's code and compilation
>> options (e.g. -DNDEBUG -O3 -ffast-math -march=native on E6550 core2
>> duo cpu -- implying SSE3 et al, eigen_vectorization macros etc etc
>> etc)... running with gcc 4.4 (threading model single) on FreeBSD with
>> drawf eh.
>>
>> My current question would be if the new versions/releases of Eigen do
>> undergo the comparative (to earlier versions) performance-related
>> benchmarks tests to find any performance regressions et al?
>>
>> The benchmarks page
>> http://eigen.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Benchmark
>> appears to list march, 2009 (oldish) as the date for benchmarks?
>>
>> ... and it only compares eigen2 vs other libs... are there any
>> already-done marks w.r.t. eigen vs eigen of different versions out
>> there?
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Leon.
>>
>>
>>
>