public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: Rainer Orth <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>,
	Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com>,
	gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [libgomp, testsuite] Support parallel testing in libgomp (PR libgomp/66005)
Date: Thu, 07 May 2015 18:07:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2ED14F3A-FC4A-4BA8-9AEE-64FB8A62C9C0@comcast.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150507113940.GI1751@tucnak.redhat.com>

On May 7, 2015, at 4:39 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 01:26:57PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> As reported in the PR, with the addition of all those OpenACC tests,
>> libgomp make check times have skyrocketed since the testsuite is still
>> run sequentially.
>> 
>> Even on a reasonably fast x86 machine (4 x 2.0 Ghz Xeon E7450) the run
>> takes 4286 seconds.
>> 
>> On slower sparc boxes (1.2 GHz UltraSPARC-T2) we're at 29406 seconds,
>> compared to 7825 seconds on the 4.9 branch.
>> 
>> Thus, the libgomp tests massively slow down the whole testsuite run,
>> being the last part to finish.
>> 
>> Fixing this proved trivial: I managed to almost literally copy the
>> solution from libstdc++-v3/testsuite/Makefile.am, with a minimal change
>> to libgomp.exp so the generated libgomp-test-support.exp file is found
>> in both the sequential and parallel cases.  This isn't an issue in
>> libstdc++ since all necessary variables are stored in a single
>> site.exp.
> 
> It is far from trivial though.
> The point is that most of the OpenMP tests are parallelized with the
> default OMP_NUM_THREADS, so running the tests in parallel oversubscribes the
> machine a lot

If OpenMP cannot keep the machine busy, then the test suite should.  A 15x speed up means that OpenMP cannot keep the machine busy.  I’d not expect OpenMP to fill the gap here, so that leave just the test suite.  So, unless someone wants to try their hand at getting some serious time from OpenMP, I think the patch lies on the path of goodness.

  reply	other threads:[~2015-05-07 18:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-05-07 11:27 Rainer Orth
2015-05-07 11:39 ` Jakub Jelinek
2015-05-07 18:07   ` Mike Stump [this message]
2015-05-08  8:40   ` Thomas Schwinge
2018-08-14  8:37     ` Martin Liška
2023-05-05  8:55     ` Support parallel testing in libgomp, part I [PR66005] Thomas Schwinge
2023-05-05  8:59       ` Support parallel testing in libgomp, part II [PR66005] Thomas Schwinge
2023-05-09 17:27         ` Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
2023-05-16 14:32         ` Support parallel testing in libgomp: fallback Perl 'flock' [PR66005] Thomas Schwinge
2023-05-06 14:15       ` Support parallel testing in libgomp, part I [PR66005] Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
2023-05-08 10:42         ` Thomas Schwinge
2023-05-08 17:52           ` Bernhard Reutner-Fischer

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=2ED14F3A-FC4A-4BA8-9AEE-64FB8A62C9C0@comcast.net \
    --to=mikestump@comcast.net \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE \
    --cc=thomas@codesourcery.com \
    /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).