search for: whetston

Hello again, I''m noticing that many of the headers in swig/classes/include have the comment: // This file was automatically generated // by extractxml.rb, part of the wxRuby project // Do not make changes directly to this file! Is this still the case, or was this just a one-time conversion? 228 out of 441 files in that directory don''t have the comment. I ask this because

...line it never completes (line 99) I noticed from the list archives that egd-0.7 is fairly new. There was some talk on 4/20 about a similar problem ( John Weaver & Brian Carrier), but I don't see any conclusion. Any thoughts? Patrick ---------- Patrick Gardella patrick at whetstonelogic.com VP-Technology patrick at freebsd.org Whetstone Logic, Inc. This space intentionally left blank.

Here''s a doc patch for keyevent.txtl. I''m also attaching two new files referenced from keyevent.txtl. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: keycode.txtl Type: application/octet-stream Size: 2446 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/wxruby-development/attachments/20080313/89e9fa1a/attachment.obj

...lications/obsequi/Obsequi        -57.12%     SingleSource/Benchmarks/Polybench/stencils/seidel-2d/seidel-2d        -50.00%     MultiSource/Benchmarks/MiBench/telecomm-gsm/telecomm-gsm        -40.09%     MultiSource/Benchmarks/mediabench/gsm/toast/toast       -39.91%     SingleSource/Benchmarks/Misc/whetstone       -39.02%     MultiSource/Benchmarks/mediabench/jpeg/jpeg-6a/cjpeg       -38.07%     MultiSource/Benchmarks/MiBench/consumer-jpeg/consumer-jpeg       -37.70% However, Polly can still lead to significant compile-time overhead for many benchmarks. As shown on:     http://188.40.87.11:8000/db_de...

...i -57.12% > SingleSource/Benchmarks/Polybench/stencils/seidel-2d/seidel-2d -50.00% > MultiSource/Benchmarks/MiBench/telecomm-gsm/telecomm-gsm -40.09% > MultiSource/Benchmarks/mediabench/gsm/toast/toast -39.91% > SingleSource/Benchmarks/Misc/whetstone -39.02% > MultiSource/Benchmarks/mediabench/jpeg/jpeg-6a/cjpeg -38.07% > MultiSource/Benchmarks/MiBench/consumer-jpeg/consumer-jpeg -37.70% Very nice work! > However, Polly can still lead to significant compile-time overhead for many benchmarks. > As shown...

Based on some tests we ran, it seems the biggest performance hit you get from running within domU is from disk I/O. We did some mysql read and write tests, and for both, our performance is about half that compared to native. Has that been others'' experience? Is there any way to make this better? We are using physical partitions. In contrast, cpu/memory tests appear to be near

...>>      SingleSource/Benchmarks/Polybench/stencils/seidel-2d/seidel-2d        -50.00% >>      MultiSource/Benchmarks/MiBench/telecomm-gsm/telecomm-gsm        -40.09% >>      MultiSource/Benchmarks/mediabench/gsm/toast/toast       -39.91% >>      SingleSource/Benchmarks/Misc/whetstone       -39.02% >>      MultiSource/Benchmarks/mediabench/jpeg/jpeg-6a/cjpeg       -38.07% >>      MultiSource/Benchmarks/MiBench/consumer-jpeg/consumer-jpeg       -37.70% > >Very nice work! > >> However, Polly can still lead to significant compile-time overhead for many b...

Ok, I''ve found a minor problem that I was able to fix, but I''m not sure if this is the right way to handle it, being new to swig and all. Basically, in wxDC.h, there''s a function declaration: void GradientFillLinear(const wxRect& rect, const wxColour& initialColour, const wxColour& destColour, wxDirection nDirection = wxEAST); The problem is

Greetings, I''m using wxRuby2 to develop an app, and I''d like to have a build of wxRuby2 to work from so that when I find something that doesn''t work, I can maybe attempt to find out why and, who knows, maybe even submit a patch once in a while. I should start by saying that I''m on Mac OS X 10.5.2. What I''d like to do is to have this build of

...( 4.2%) Combine redundant instructions 0.0000 ( 0.0%) 0.0000 ( 0.0%) 0.0000 ( 0.0%) 0.0020 ( 3.2%) Combine redundant instructions 0.0000 ( 0.0%) 0.0000 ( 0.0%) 0.0000 ( 0.0%) 0.0020 ( 3.1%) Combine redundant instructions Similar results have been found in the benchmark whetstone. I will have a full test using LLVM test-suite tonight to see whether it has similar effectiveness for other test-suite benchmarks. @Tobias, do you have any idea about the performance impact and other consequences that if we remove such a canonicalization pass. In my option, it should not be imp...

...s >> >> test-case | after-patch | before-patch >> ----------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------ >> Dhrystone 2 using register variables | 334600751.0 lps | 335319028.3 lps >> Double-Precision Whetstone | 32856.1 MWIPS | 32849.6 MWIPS >> Execl Throughput | 3662.1 lps | 2718.0 lps >> File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks | 432906.4 KBps | 158011.8 KBps >> File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks | 116023.0 KBps |...

...( 4.2%) Combine redundant instructions 0.0000 ( 0.0%) 0.0000 ( 0.0%) 0.0000 ( 0.0%) 0.0020 ( 3.2%) Combine redundant instructions 0.0000 ( 0.0%) 0.0000 ( 0.0%) 0.0000 ( 0.0%) 0.0020 ( 3.1%) Combine redundant instructions Similar results have been found in the benchmark whetstone. I will have a full test using LLVM test-suite tonight to see whether it has similar effectiveness for other test-suite benchmarks. @Tobias, do you have any idea about the performance impact and other consequences that if we remove such a canonicalization pass. In my option, it should not be imp...

On 09/09/2013 05:18 AM, Star Tan wrote: > > At 2013-09-09 05:52:35,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > >> On 09/08/2013 08:03 PM, Star Tan wrote: >> Also, I wonder if your runs include the dependence analysis. If this is >> the case, the numbers are very good. Otherwise, 30% overhead seems still >> to be a little bit much. > I think

...0, 8 cpus guest: kernel 5.5.0-rc1, 16 vcpus test-case | after-patch | before-patch ----------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------ Dhrystone 2 using register variables | 334600751.0 lps | 335319028.3 lps Double-Precision Whetstone | 32856.1 MWIPS | 32849.6 MWIPS Execl Throughput | 3662.1 lps | 2718.0 lps File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks | 432906.4 KBps | 158011.8 KBps File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks | 116023.0 KBps | 37664.0 KBps File Copy 4096 bu...

...0, 8 cpus guest: kernel 5.5.0-rc1, 16 vcpus test-case | after-patch | before-patch ----------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------ Dhrystone 2 using register variables | 334600751.0 lps | 335319028.3 lps Double-Precision Whetstone | 32856.1 MWIPS | 32849.6 MWIPS Execl Throughput | 3662.1 lps | 2718.0 lps File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks | 432906.4 KBps | 158011.8 KBps File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks | 116023.0 KBps | 37664.0 KBps File Copy 4096 bu...

...even more dubious. In particular, only the first 6 rows contain programs with reasonable runtimes. This means that the 7x speedups for going from 0.021 -> 0.003 don't really count. :) That said, we are still getting a 1.88x an 2.32x speedup on the int/fp drystones and a 1.82x speedup on whetstone. > Overall impression: > 1) CBE code is already rather quicker then GCC > 2) LLC code is rather slower then CBE, but comparable to GCC LLC code is only really comparable on testcases where the LLVM optimizer is doing really good things, such as C++ programs. Right now with the linear s...

...gleSource/Benchmarks/Polybench/linear-algebra/kernels/trmm/trmm Last time I checked the impact of Polly on the TSVC benchmarks I realized that the effect was due to unrelated passes scheduled by Polly. This might have changed by now but I doubt it. This leaves ten improved Polybench benchmarks and whetstone. At least my local version of Polly does not optimize the latter, thus the effect might be the same as for the three TSVC benchmarks. For the Polybench benchmarks it would be interesting to know what kind of transformation improved ten of them and what regressed five others. I am especially intere...

Hi all, i was thinking that this question was not good right after relese 1.0, but now perhaps it is OK... if not, then I am sorry. So, what about current status of benchmarks? I mean comparison to gcc. I have looked at http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/testresults/X86/ Unfortunatelly graphs lines are hardly for human eye, but tables are OK. I give my own interpretation for April 26, 2004

...0, 8 CPUs guest: kernel 5.5.0-rc1, 16 VCPUs test-case | after-patch | before-patch ----------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------ Dhrystone 2 using register variables | 334600751.0 lps | 335319028.3 lps Double-Precision Whetstone | 32856.1 MWIPS | 32849.6 MWIPS Execl Throughput | 3662.1 lps | 2718.0 lps File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks | 432906.4 KBps | 158011.8 KBps File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks | 116023.0 KBps | 37664.0 KBps File Copy...

Hi all, I've started looking at the GlobalMerge pass, enabled by default on ARM and AArch64. I think we should reconsider that, at least for AArch64. As is, the pass just merges all globals together, in groups of 4KB (AArch64, 128B on ARM). At the time it was enabled, the general thinking was "it's almost free, it doesn't affect performance much, we might as well use it".