From: Rainer Orth <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Improve Solaris mudflap support (PR libmudflap/49550)
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 16:16:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <yddr563gzbf.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110706160706.GB24690@redhat.com> (Frank Ch. Eigler's message of "Wed, 6 Jul 2011 12:07:06 -0400")
Hi Frank,
>> > * Some tests were failing while calling unregister in munmap. It turned
>> > out that there had been no corresponding mmap registration before.
>> > This occurs because Solaris has mmap64 for largefile-aware programs
>> > instead. Fixed by wrapping mmap64, too. What I don't know is if
>> > mmap64 needs to be added to MFWRAP_SPEC in gcc.c?
>
> I believe so.
ok, though I haven't seen a failure so far without.
>> > If so, I'd rather do it by adding some MFWRAP_OS_SPEC to avoid
>> > having to duplicate the whole spec in the Solaris config
>> > headers.
>
> Why would solaris have to duplicate MFWRAP_SPEC if mmap64 is added to
> the default gcc.c one?
I assumed that you wanted to keep the default generic, and meant to
separate target specific additions from the generic part.
>> > * libmudflap.c/heap-scalestress.c always timed out on my SPARC test
>> > system: on a 1.2 GHz UltraSPARC-T2, it takes
>> >
>> > real 8:47.06
>> > user 43.12
>> > sys 8:03.77
>> >
>> > which is way over the limit. On my laptop (1.6 GHz Core i7), it takes
>> >
>> > real 37.35
>> > user 5.06
>> > sys 32.23
>> >
>> > I've divided SCALE by 10 to account for this.
>
> OK; I'm surprised by the order-of-magnitude performance difference
> between the machines though.
Right: though the Niagara CPUs are slow, I hadn't expected that much
either.
So if you agree, I can add mmap64 to the default MFWRAP_SPEC. All other
parts are approved, I think.
In the meantime, I've rebuild and re-tested on Solaris 11/x86, too.
While the gld results are as good as on SPARC, I still get several
failures with Sun ld (which works fine on SPARC). I haven't analyzed
them yet.
I could either commit the current version with the MFWRAP_SPEC addition
and work from there, or wait until those failures are understood and
fixed, too.
Thanks.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-06 16:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-30 17:37 Rainer Orth
2011-07-04 13:27 ` Rainer Orth
[not found] ` <20110706160706.GB24690@redhat.com>
2011-07-06 16:16 ` Rainer Orth [this message]
2011-07-06 16:58 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2011-07-06 17:11 ` Rainer Orth
2011-07-07 10:10 ` Rainer Orth
2011-07-06 16:16 Frank Ch. Eigler
2011-07-07 12:36 Uros Bizjak
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=yddr563gzbf.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE \
--to=ro@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de \
--cc=fche@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@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).