From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16423 invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2013 21:14:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-ports-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-ports-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 16411 invoked by uid 89); 10 Sep 2013 21:13:59 -0000 Received: from multi.imgtec.com (HELO multi.imgtec.com) (194.200.65.239) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 10 Sep 2013 21:13:59 +0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,NO_RECEIVED,NO_RELAYS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: multi.imgtec.com Message-ID: <1378847551.5770.384.camel@ubuntu-sellcey> Subject: Re: [patch, mips] Improved memset for MIPS From: Steve Ellcey To: Carlos O'Donell CC: Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 21:14:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <522F88A6.1000904@redhat.com> References: <93a232b5-9d0b-4a27-bbb5-16e3ae7c4b89@BAMAIL02.ba.imgtec.org> <522957A4.2030400@redhat.com> <1378483403.5770.307.camel@ubuntu-sellcey> <522A0CF8.8040008@redhat.com> <1378510388.5770.346.camel@ubuntu-sellcey> <522A9197.9000601@redhat.com> <1378844980.5770.378.camel@ubuntu-sellcey> <522F88A6.1000904@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SEF-Processed: 7_3_0_01192__2013_09_10_22_13_55 X-SW-Source: 2013-09/txt/msg00080.txt.bz2 On Tue, 2013-09-10 at 17:01 -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > > Now that I can see the results of 'make bench' I do have a question, > > what is the difference between the results in bench-memset.out and > > bench-memset-ifunc.out? MIPS doesn't yet support IFUNC. It looks like > > the results in the two files are pretty close, so maybe they are > > identical runs on machines with no IFUNC? > > You get the default implementation of __libc_ifunc_impl_list (the function > used by the testing infrastructure to iterate the functions implemented > as ifuncs) which adds no additional functions to the test list. You still > test the usual defaults e.g. simple, builtin, and original function entry. > Therefore it's the same as the non-IFUNC version with the results being > the same modulo testing variance. > > Does that answer your question? I think so, but just to be clear: If I did have IFUNC and 4 different implementations of memset (for example), would the testing infrastructure run and benchmark all 4 versions of memset? Steve Ellcey