[Wien] Benchmark-Compilation options
Martin Hilgeman
hilgeman at sgi.com
Fri Jun 16 14:46:28 CEST 2006
Dear Peter,
On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 08:06 +0200, Peter Blaha wrote:
> Just noticed, that your timing does not seem to be cortrect. Check
> cputim.c; Some machines report the cputime in different units and you
> should divide by 1024 instead of 100.
That's right, the current implementation in the various cputim.c files
is not portable. I'd advise it to change it like:
--- 00/SRC_lapw1/cputim.c 2002-12-09 06:04:22.000000000 -0800
+++ 01/SRC_lapw1/cputim.c 2006-03-01 03:12:15.158745600 -0800
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
struct tms buffer;
times(&buffer);
- *dsec = (double)buffer.tms_utime/100.0;
+ *dsec = (double)buffer.tms_utime/sysconf(_SC_CLK_TCK);
/* fprintf(stderr,"inside cputim: %lf\n",dsec);*/
}
> I've also heared from an Bull Itanium system and they gave very similar
> timings as the Altix. So I guess these values should be reachable. Since
> your "Hamilt-time" is ok (besides the factor 10), it is mainly the
> gotoblas, which makes the difference. Also your report that you get the
> same timings with/without goto tells me, that you are NOT using the
> gotolib (or not a good version). I guess, the goto-libraries were changed
> with version 1.0 and one has to compile them himself, so maybe older
> versions (precompiled) were more efficient .... ???
I do not have first hand experience with self-compiled GOTO libraries,
only used the precompiled version when they were still available. I can
imagine that for a highly tuned BLAS implementation (like GOTO's), the
exact compiler version and options are extremely important.
> Always remember: The hamilt time is purely f90 + svml-lib code, hns is
> mixed f90 + blas, and diag is purely blas-code. So compare the partial
> times.
regards,
-Martin
--
Martin Hilgeman Chemical Applications Engineering
Phone: +31(0)30-6696885
SGI E-mail: hilgeman at sgi.com
The Netherlands URL: http://www.sgi.com/go/chembio
More information about the Wien
mailing list