public inbox for gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "M.V.S. Phani Narasimham" <phanimvs@wipinfo.soft.net>
To: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Hard ware long dooble operations are slower.
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 02:14:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.991230152728.27611A-100000@gem> (raw)

hi,
Why quad floatine point instructions of sparcv9 are very slower,
compared to the instructions which make call to the library and
perform the operations.
The following c code takes more time when compiled with cc1 of gcc
with option -mhard-quad-float than when compiled with sun cc.

-----------------------------------------------------------
c code:-
     1  main(){
     2  long double a=2e0;
     3  int i;
     4  for(i=0;i<10000000;i++)
     5          a=a+2;
     6  printf("%Lfg\n",a);
     7  }

The c code generates an faddq instruction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Time taken details:-

real    4m36.96s
user    0m23.33s
sys     1m8.59s

-------------------------------------------------------------------

If Sun cc is used it makes a call to the library (_Qp_add_)
and the details of the time are.

real    0m14.77s
user    0m5.01s
sys     0m0.01s

------------------------------------------------------------------

I could not see any trap handler that get's invoked when the hard quad
instructions are generated. Is it that they are implimented in the system
software or firmware. If so why is it slow.

phani.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 M.V.S. Phani Narasimham	  
 Global R & D Solutions	    	 
 1 st Block,7 th main road,No:8
 Kormangla
 BANGLORE-36 , India
 Ph- 5530053 ext.1053           
 E-MAIL- phani.sesha@wipro.com
 www.wipro.com
 The World's First SEI CMM LEVEL 5 Software Services Company
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID

From: "M.V.S. Phani Narasimham" <phanimvs@wipinfo.soft.net>
To: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Hard ware long dooble operations are slower.
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 22:24:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.991230152728.27611A-100000@gem> (raw)
Message-ID: <19991231222400.Opl6fbo04P39A3-qAq-VzqUokps8z6GUbY9IJ2Zbhy4@z> (raw)

hi,
Why quad floatine point instructions of sparcv9 are very slower,
compared to the instructions which make call to the library and
perform the operations.
The following c code takes more time when compiled with cc1 of gcc
with option -mhard-quad-float than when compiled with sun cc.

-----------------------------------------------------------
c code:-
     1  main(){
     2  long double a=2e0;
     3  int i;
     4  for(i=0;i<10000000;i++)
     5          a=a+2;
     6  printf("%Lfg\n",a);
     7  }

The c code generates an faddq instruction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Time taken details:-

real    4m36.96s
user    0m23.33s
sys     1m8.59s

-------------------------------------------------------------------

If Sun cc is used it makes a call to the library (_Qp_add_)
and the details of the time are.

real    0m14.77s
user    0m5.01s
sys     0m0.01s

------------------------------------------------------------------

I could not see any trap handler that get's invoked when the hard quad
instructions are generated. Is it that they are implimented in the system
software or firmware. If so why is it slow.

phani.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 M.V.S. Phani Narasimham	  
 Global R & D Solutions	    	 
 1 st Block,7 th main road,No:8
 Kormangla
 BANGLORE-36 , India
 Ph- 5530053 ext.1053           
 E-MAIL- phani.sesha@wipro.com
 www.wipro.com
 The World's First SEI CMM LEVEL 5 Software Services Company
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


             reply	other threads:[~1999-12-30  2:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
1999-12-30  2:14 M.V.S. Phani Narasimham [this message]
1999-12-31 22:24 ` M.V.S. Phani Narasimham

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Pine.GSO.3.96.991230152728.27611A-100000@gem \
    --to=phanimvs@wipinfo.soft.net \
    --cc=gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).