similar to: compiling r with icc

Hi! I've been playing with MKL for a few days and I noticed the instructions in the R Installation Administration manual [1] no longer apply. It seems that since version 10.0 (the one used by the manual), libmkl_lapack.so has been renamed/split (although the official explanations seem to imply this was already the case in 10.0 [2]). As a consequence, the instructions for dynamic linking no

On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 20:49 +0200, arnaud gaboury wrote: > On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 7:35 PM, arnaud gaboury <arnaud.gaboury at gmail.com> wrote: > > After a few days of reading and headache, I finally gave a try at > > building R from source with Intel MKL and ICC. Documentation and posts > > on this topic are rather incomplete, sometime fantasist et do not give > >

After a few days of reading and headache, I finally gave a try at building R from source with Intel MKL and ICC. Documentation and posts on this topic are rather incomplete, sometime fantasist et do not give much explanations about configure options. As I am not sure if mine is correct, I would appreciate some advices and hints. OS: Fedora 22 parallel_studio_xe_2016 Hardware : 8 Thread(s) per

Since e164.org added DNC and ADDRESS records my enum configuration has failed. Using both the old EnumLookup app and the new ENUMLOOKUP function, the lookups have consistantly failed since e164.org added E2U+ADDRESS and E2U+DNC records. Mar 6 17:39:44 WARNING[14222]: enum.c:235 parse_naptr: NAPTR Regex match failed. Mar 6 17:39:44 WARNING[14222]: enum.c:354 enum_callback: Failed to parse naptr

I'm having a Thursday morning mental block, any suggestions on the following would be most appreciated... I have (as an example) surgery = c("d48", "d67", "dnc37", "a75", "d10", "a78", "d31", "d55", "d1") before each number part the possibilities are c("a", "d",

On Sat, 2015-09-05 at 11:53 +0200, arnaud gaboury wrote: > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Martyn Plummer <plummerm at iarc.fr> wrote: > > On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 20:49 +0200, arnaud gaboury wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 7:35 PM, arnaud gaboury <arnaud.gaboury at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > After a few days of reading and headache, I finally gave a try at

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Nathan Kurz <nate at verse.com> wrote: > > As a short and simple approach, I just compiled the current R release > on Ubuntu with ICC and MKL using just this: > > $ tar -xzf R-3.2.2.tar.gz > $ cd R-3.2.2 > $ CC=icc CXX=icpc AR=xiar LD=xild CFLAGS="-g -O3 -xHost" CXXFLAGS="-g > -O3 -xHost" ./configure

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 8:11 PM, Nathan Kurz <nate at verse.com> wrote: > Hi Arnaud -- > > I'm glad it's working for you. I'm not sure I understand your final > answer. Are you saying that the version I posted worked for you as > given, or that you had to remove some of the other options? I say it works perfectly when using the single dynamic library (lmkl_rt):

On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 7:35 PM, arnaud gaboury <arnaud.gaboury at gmail.com> wrote: > After a few days of reading and headache, I finally gave a try at > building R from source with Intel MKL and ICC. Documentation and posts > on this topic are rather incomplete, sometime fantasist et do not give > much explanations about configure options. > As I am not sure if mine is

Hi, I recently had a problem installing the rgl package on OS X and put together a simple patch. The patched package is available here: http://jinome.stanford.edu/files/rgl_0.66-patched_for_gcc4.tar.gz It can be installed with "R CMD INSTALL rgl_0.66-patched_for_gcc4.tar.gz" as normal at the command line. Also -- as of right now rgl is not in the repository of version 2.3 packages

On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:26:38AM +0200, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Jack, > >> Attached are the Polyhedron 2005 benchmark results for current llvm/dragonegg svn >> on x86_64-apple-darwin11 built against Xcode 4.3.2 and FSF gcc 4.6.3. > > thanks for the numbers. How does this compare to LLVM 3.0 - were there any > regressions? The results from just before

On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Martyn Plummer <plummerm at iarc.fr> wrote: > On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 20:49 +0200, arnaud gaboury wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 7:35 PM, arnaud gaboury <arnaud.gaboury at gmail.com> wrote: >> > After a few days of reading and headache, I finally gave a try at >> > building R from source with Intel MKL and ICC. Documentation

On Saturday 31 January 2009 03:42:04 Eli Friedman wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Jon Harrop <jon at ffconsultancy.com> wrote: > > I just remembered an anomalous result that I stumbled upon whilst > > tweaking the command-line options to llvm-gcc. Specifically, the -msse3 > > flag > > The -msse3 flag? Does the -msse2 flag have a similar effect? Yes: $

Duncan, Below are the tabulated compile times and executable sizes. A) gcc 4.5.4svn using -msse3 -ffast-math -O3 -fno-tree-vectorize B) gcc 4.5.4svn/dragonegg using -msse3 -ffast-math -O3 -fno-tree-vectorize -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns C) gcc 4.5.4svn/dragonegg using -msse3 -ffast-math -O3 -fno-tree-vectorize Compile time (seconds) Benchmark A) stock B) gcc 4.5.4/ C)

Current dragonegg svn has all of the -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns bugs for usage with -ffast-math -O3 addressed except for those related to PR2314. Using the -fno-tree-vectorize option, we can evaluate the current state of -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns with the Polyhedron 2005 benchmarks compared to stock dragonegg and stock gcc 4.5.4. The runtime benchmarks below show that

On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 08:57:51 -0400 Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo.med.uc.edu> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:26:38AM +0200, Duncan Sands wrote: > > Hi Jack, > > > >> Attached are the Polyhedron 2005 benchmark results for current > >> llvm/dragonegg svn on x86_64-apple-darwin11 built against Xcode > >> 4.3.2 and FSF gcc 4.6.3. > > >

Attached are the Polyhedron 2005 benchmark results for current llvm/dragonegg svn on x86_64-apple-darwin11 built against Xcode 4.3.2 and FSF gcc 4.6.3. The benchmarks for -msse3 and -msse4 appear identical (at least for degg+optnz). This is fortunate since there seems to be a bug in -msse4 on 2.33 GHz (T7600) Intel Core 2 Duo Merom (http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=12434).

On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 03:44:40PM +0200, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Jack, thanks for doing this. > >> Below are the tabulated compile times and executable sizes. >> >> A) gcc 4.5.4svn using -msse3 -ffast-math -O3 -fno-tree-vectorize >> B) gcc 4.5.4svn/dragonegg using -msse3 -ffast-math -O3 -fno-tree-vectorize -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns >> C)

Duncan, With the commit from http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20121203/158488.html, the Polyhedron 2005 benchmarks complete again on x86_64-apple-darwin12. The result are similar to what were seen with FSF gcc 4.6.2svn and llvm/dragonegg 3.0 (which was the last release that passed pb05) http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-October/044091.html. Jack

I just remembered an anomalous result that I stumbled upon whilst tweaking the command-line options to llvm-gcc. Specifically, the -msse3 flag does a great job improving the performance of floating point intensive code on the SciMark2 benchmark but it also degrades the performance of the int-intensive Monte Carlo part of the test: $ llvm-gcc -Wall -lm -O3 *.c -o scimark2 $ ./scimark2 Using