From: Kevin Atkinson <kevina@gnu.org>
To: Robert Dewar <dewar@gnat.com>
Cc: Peter.Sasi@t-systems.co.hu, <aj@suse.de>, <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
<tjw@omnigroup.com>
Subject: Re: [GCC 3.x] Performance testing for QA
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 13:41:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0209031637190.26207-100000@kevin-pc.atkinson.dhs.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020903203616.7FE59F2941@nile.gnat.com>
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Robert Dewar wrote:
> <<However, encoding/decoding (especially encoding) is one area were speed
> really matters. Encoding in real time (with out sacrificing quality) is
> still not passable with many codecs except on the newest machines.
> Unfortunately, because video work is so computationally extensive significant
> portions of the code are often rewritten is assembly to take advantage of
> MMX etc instructions that many compilers do not produce normally. This
> means that that pure C versions may not exist or if they do they are not
> coded optimally.
> >>
>
> This is all true.
>
> But what does it have to do with being a good benchmark?
The type of operations that encoder decoders use (lots of arithmetic and
data movement) should somehow be incorporate as a benchmark test gcc
should optimize for. The ideal goal would be to make the code fast enough
that hand written assembly would not be necessary. Thus using an encoder as
a benchmark would be beneficial. Even if it concentrates on tight loops.
---
http://kevin.atkinson.dhs.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-09-03 20:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-03 13:36 Robert Dewar
2002-09-03 13:41 ` Kevin Atkinson [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-09-03 14:25 Robert Dewar
2002-09-03 14:15 Robert Dewar
2002-09-03 13:56 Robert Dewar
2002-09-03 13:55 Robert Dewar
2002-09-03 14:05 ` Kevin Atkinson
2002-09-03 14:12 ` Dale Johannesen
2002-09-03 13:25 Robert Dewar
2002-09-03 13:31 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-09-03 14:28 ` Jan Hubicka
2002-09-02 15:50 Robert Dewar
2002-09-02 15:49 Robert Dewar
2002-09-03 10:32 ` Dale Johannesen
2002-09-03 11:17 ` Kevin Atkinson
2002-09-02 14:47 Robert Dewar
2002-09-02 15:42 ` Timothy J. Wood
2002-09-02 6:12 Sasi Péter
2002-09-02 14:08 ` Andreas Jaeger
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.LNX.4.44.0209031637190.26207-100000@kevin-pc.atkinson.dhs.org \
--to=kevina@gnu.org \
--cc=Peter.Sasi@t-systems.co.hu \
--cc=aj@suse.de \
--cc=dewar@gnat.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=tjw@omnigroup.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).