Author: Andrew Williams
Date: 12:57:46 02/16/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 16, 2005 at 15:33:24, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On February 16, 2005 at 14:28:57, Dieter Buerssner wrote: > >>On February 16, 2005 at 13:19:46, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On February 16, 2005 at 13:09:14, Frank Phillips wrote: >> >>>>I have been using the profile generated optimisation option, but the code it >>>>produces is no faster then with simple -O3. >> >>I have no experience on AMD64. On x86 it works well for me, under Linux and >>Windows. >> >>>ICC (Intel's compiler) works fine and that is what I use >>>myself. >> >>Does profile guided optimizatation with ICC work for you, when you run crafty >>under xboard. It doesn't work for me. > >Never tried. I do my profile runs via a "Make profile" where I have a target >that compiles for profiling, runs a bunch of test cases, then compiles using the >data gathered to improve the code. So my profiling is all in "command mode" as >well, which is just as good since the xboard stuff is not in the search of my >program at all anyway. > > >> Console runs work fine. With gcc, I can >>rund a match Yace-Crafty under Xboard. That gave better speedups than >>test-suites. But no luck with ICC here. I get very modest speedups with PGO and >>ICC (more with gcc). However, ICC is fast even without PGO. > >I can't get gcc to compile and run crafty with profiling optimizations. It will >produce the profile data files fine, but when I go to re-compile with the >options to use the profile data, it complains about one or more of the profile >data files being corrupted. I've tested this hundreds of times since this was >put into gcc, no luck at all. I seem to recall I might have gotten it to work >on the opteron last year, but I don't believe there was any speedup if I did, >and I might well be remembering that wrong anyway. > >But gcc won't profile-optimize for me period. although it will profile just fine >and produce output that helps in analyzing performance. > > > I had this phenomenon and I got rid of it by removing an optimization option. I'm afraid I don't remember which one, but I think it was -fomit_frame_pointer; I discovered what the problem was while reading a website, which I can no longer find. Andrew
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.