similar to: Any recommendation about benchmarking tools on Linux virtual machine?

On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 5:53 AM, Allen Qiu <my1stbox@163.com> wrote: > Do you have any recommendation about benchmarking tools on Linux > virtual machine for measure the potential performance hit by > virtualization, especially on multi-threads computation You could try the phoronix-test-suite which is available in the [EPEL][1] repository. Cheers, Cristian Ciupitu [1]:

FYI http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=gcc_llvm_clang&num=1

On 27 April 2010 08:18, Stefano Delli Ponti <stefano.delliponti at gmail.com> wrote: > FYI > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=gcc_llvm_clang&num=1 For Apache and Dhrystone, the performance boost is good (but only the former is really important), but for the rest, especially those with image/sound processing, and HMMR, it's still far behind. Is this only

----- Original Message ----- > From: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> > To: Cristian Ciupitu <cristian.ciupitu@yahoo.com> > Cc: libvirt-users <libvirt-users@redhat.com> > Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 11:24 PM > Subject: Re: [libvirt-users] Stop the relabeling of CD images > So maybe this would do it: > > <source file=...> >   <seclabel

----- Original Message ----- > From: Martin Kletzander <mkletzan@redhat.com> > To: Cristian Ciupitu <cristian.ciupitu@yahoo.com> > Cc: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>; libvirt-users <libvirt-users@redhat.com> > Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 6:05 PM > Subject: Re: [libvirt-users] Stop the relabeling of CD images > > On 08/20/2013 04:19 AM, Cristian

Hi all, What is the difference between starting virt-manager by "virt-manager" and by "sudo virt-manager"? It seems that there are two copy of virt-manager running in the background. When I run "virt-manager", I got a error of "Unable to open a connection to the libvirt management daemon. Libvirt URI is: qemu:///system Verify that: - The 'libvirtd'

On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 09:37:53AM +0100, Renato Golin wrote: > On 27 April 2010 08:18, Stefano Delli Ponti > <stefano.delliponti at gmail.com> wrote: > > FYI > > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=gcc_llvm_clang&num=1 > > For Apache and Dhrystone, the performance boost is good (but only the > former is really important), but for the rest,

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=apple_llvm_gcc&num=1 Regards, Stefano

Hi, I'm installing the operating system for my virtual machines from CD images and I would like for libvirtd to stop relabeling the corresponding files.  Since the installation media is no big secret, I have labeled the files with system_u:object_r:public_content_t:s0, but libvirtd keeps changing them to system_u:object_r:svirt_image_t:s0.  It also changes the ownership to qemu:qemu.  This

For interest. It looks like LLVM is the ultimate Dhrystone compiler! :) http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=gcc_llvm_clang&num=1 It's nice that they compared against llvm 2.7 prerelease. -Chris

And this one, with LLVM ~3.0: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_bulldozer_compilers&num=1 -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Martin Whitaker Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2011 11:01 Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] The performance of LLVM vs GCC [and copy to

AMD is dropping support for the R300-R500 cards in their official drivers: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_r500_legacy&num=1 As the current open source drivers do not support 3D, I'd like to know which Compiz effects use 3D and which use 2D. Thanks. -- Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il

Hi all, This talk includes the performance comparison between LLVM and GCC (page 30/31): LLVM wins a lot for both compilation and execution time. http://llvm.org/pubs/2008-10-04-ACAT-LLVM-Intro.pdf That talk and data were in 2008, I was wondering if there is any updated performance evaluation between the latest LLVM and GCC? Thanks. -- Jianzhou

Hi everyone. I read on a 2011 article - http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=nouveau_comp_2011&num=19 - that my particular card, GeForce 8400 GS, overheats with nouveau. (So, I never tried using if for long, before, as soon as possible, installing the proprietary drivers...) But, because it's a 2-year-old article, I was wondering if that problem could have been, in the

[and copy to list] Jianzhou Zhao wrote: > Hi all, > > This talk includes the performance comparison between LLVM and GCC > (page 30/31): LLVM wins a lot for both compilation and execution time. > http://llvm.org/pubs/2008-10-04-ACAT-LLVM-Intro.pdf > That talk and data were in 2008, I was wondering if there is any > updated performance evaluation between the latest LLVM and

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=llvm_gcc_dragonegg28&num=1 as of version 2.8, LLVM is generating slower code than the newer GCCs but generates the code more quickly.

Hi Edwin, >> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=llvm_gcc_dragonegg28&num=1 >> as of version 2.8, LLVM is generating slower code than the newer GCCs >> but generates the code more quickly. >> > > I would be more concerned about the 'unable to compile', or 'compiled > code not working correctly' issues. It would help if they

On 11/03/11 10:11, Rotem, Nadav wrote: > And this one, with LLVM ~3.0: > > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_bulldozer_compilers&num=1 What, no dragonegg?! :) Ciao, Duncan.

Hi, this is about kicking-off regular compile-time tracking for LLVM and CLANG on the green dragon: http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/view/Compile%20Time/ <http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/view/Compile%20Time/>. The goal is to stay on top of compile-time issues immediately when they occur so they can be assessed rather than creeping in unnoticed. The methodology is simple: form a CTMark suite

On Sep 14, 2009, at 3:20 AM, Stefano Delli Ponti wrote: > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php? > page=article&item=apple_llvm_gcc&num=1 Unfortunately, they don't specify what flags are used, what architecture is compiled for etc. It's entirely possible that they are accidentally compiling the llvm-gcc binaries for x86-32 and the gcc ones for x86-64 for example. If