public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wilco Dijkstra <Wilco.Dijkstra@arm.com>
To: "mjambor@suse.cz" <mjambor@suse.cz>
Cc: "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>, nd <nd@arm.com>,
	Steve Ellcey	<sellcey@cavium.com>,
	Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>,
	"pmenzel+gcc.gnu.org@molgen.mpg.de"
	<pmenzel+gcc.gnu.org@molgen.mpg.de>
Subject: Re: How to get GCC on par with ICC?
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 11:48:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <DB5PR08MB10302D16370CB306B77A6104837C0@DB5PR08MB1030.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> (raw)

Martin wrote:

> Keep in mind that when discussing FP benchmarks, the used math library
> can be (almost) as important as the compiler.  In the case of 481.wrf,
> we found that the GCC 8 + glibc 2.26 (so the "out-of-the box" GNU)
> performance is about 70% of ICC's.  When we just linked against AMD's
> libm, we got to 83%. When we instructed GCC to generate calls to Intel's
> SVML library and linked against it, we got to 91%.  Using both SVML and
> AMD's libm, we achieved 93%.
>
> That means that there likely still is 7% to be gained from more clever
> optimizations in GCC but the real problem is in GNU libm.  And 481.wrf
> is perhaps the most extreme example but definitely not the only one.

You really should retry with GLIBC 2.27 since several key math functions were
rewritten from scratch by Szabolcs Nagy (all in generic C code), resulting in huge
performance gains on all targets (eg. wrf improved over 50%).

I fixed several double precision functions in current GLIBC to avoid extremely bad
performance which had been complained about for years. There are more math
functions on the way, so the GNU libm will not only catch up, but become the fastest
math library available.

Wilco

             reply	other threads:[~2018-06-15 11:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-06-15 11:48 Wilco Dijkstra [this message]
2018-06-15 17:03 ` Jeff Law
2018-06-15 18:01   ` Joseph Myers
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-06-06 15:57 Paul Menzel
2018-06-06 16:14 ` Joel Sherrill
2018-06-06 16:20   ` Paul Menzel
2018-06-20 22:42   ` NightStrike
2018-06-21  9:20     ` Richard Biener
2018-06-22  0:48     ` Steve Ellcey
2018-06-06 16:22 ` Bin.Cheng
2018-06-06 18:31 ` Dmitry Mikushin
2018-06-06 21:10   ` Ryan Burn
2018-06-07 10:02     ` Richard Biener
2018-06-06 22:43   ` Zan Lynx
2018-06-07  9:54     ` Richard Biener
2018-06-07 10:06 ` Richard Biener
2018-06-08 22:08   ` Steve Ellcey
2018-06-09 15:32     ` Marc Glisse
2018-06-11 14:50     ` Martin Jambor
2018-06-22 22:41       ` Szabolcs Nagy

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=DB5PR08MB10302D16370CB306B77A6104837C0@DB5PR08MB1030.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=wilco.dijkstra@arm.com \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=mjambor@suse.cz \
    --cc=nd@arm.com \
    --cc=pmenzel+gcc.gnu.org@molgen.mpg.de \
    --cc=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
    --cc=sellcey@cavium.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).