486 Optimizations...

Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> writes:

Anyone care if I build a patch to kill the -m486 type options in the
following files:

$ grep -i -- 486 *
bsdi: i?86) CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -m486";;
freebsd:CFLAGS='-O2 -m486 -pipe'
univel:CFLAGS='-v -O -K i486,host,inline,loop_unroll -Dsvr4'

Why would you want to? Not all gccs support -mpentium/mpentiumpro etc.

--
Trond Eivind Glomsr�d
Red Hat, Inc.

* Trond Eivind Glomsr?d <teg@redhat.com> [001114 15:43]:

Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> writes:

Anyone care if I build a patch to kill the -m486 type options in the
following files:

$ grep -i -- 486 *
bsdi: i?86) CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -m486";;
freebsd:CFLAGS='-O2 -m486 -pipe'
univel:CFLAGS='-v -O -K i486,host,inline,loop_unroll -Dsvr4'

Why would you want to? Not all gccs support -mpentium/mpentiumpro etc.

I would remove it entirely.

Why should a package FORCE 486 or any other processor optimizations?

Larry

--
Trond Eivind Glomsr�d
Red Hat, Inc.

--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 972-414-9812 (voice) Internet: ler@lerctr.org
US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749

* Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> [001114 13:42] wrote:

Anyone care if I build a patch to kill the -m486 type options in the
following files:

$ grep -i -- 486 *
bsdi: i?86) CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -m486";;
freebsd:CFLAGS='-O2 -m486 -pipe'
univel:CFLAGS='-v -O -K i486,host,inline,loop_unroll -Dsvr4'
$ pwd
/home/ler/pg-dev/pgsql/src/template
$

I have a patch pending for FreeBSD to support alpha builds that
also disables -m486 so if you left the freebsd template alone it
would be ok.

--
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."

* Trond Eivind Glomsr�d <teg@redhat.com> [001114 13:45] wrote:

Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> writes:

Anyone care if I build a patch to kill the -m486 type options in the
following files:

$ grep -i -- 486 *
bsdi: i?86) CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -m486";;
freebsd:CFLAGS='-O2 -m486 -pipe'
univel:CFLAGS='-v -O -K i486,host,inline,loop_unroll -Dsvr4'

Why would you want to? Not all gccs support -mpentium/mpentiumpro etc.

The idea is to remove it entirely (I hope) not add even more arch
specific compile flags.

--
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."

* Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> [001114 15:46]:

* Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> [001114 13:42] wrote:

Anyone care if I build a patch to kill the -m486 type options in the
following files:

$ grep -i -- 486 *
bsdi: i?86) CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -m486";;
freebsd:CFLAGS='-O2 -m486 -pipe'
univel:CFLAGS='-v -O -K i486,host,inline,loop_unroll -Dsvr4'
$ pwd
/home/ler/pg-dev/pgsql/src/template
$

I have a patch pending for FreeBSD to support alpha builds that
also disables -m486 so if you left the freebsd template alone it
would be ok.

I have a P-III, I don't want the template to specify it *AT ALL*.
(this is on FreeBSD 4.2-BETA).

It seems like GCC does the right (or mostly right) thing without
the -m option....

--
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."

--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 972-414-9812 (voice) Internet: ler@lerctr.org
US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749

Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> writes:

* Trond Eivind Glomsr?d <teg@redhat.com> [001114 15:43]:

Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> writes:

Anyone care if I build a patch to kill the -m486 type options in the
following files:

$ grep -i -- 486 *
bsdi: i?86) CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -m486";;
freebsd:CFLAGS='-O2 -m486 -pipe'
univel:CFLAGS='-v -O -K i486,host,inline,loop_unroll -Dsvr4'

Why would you want to? Not all gccs support -mpentium/mpentiumpro etc.

I would remove it entirely.

Why should a package FORCE 486 or any other processor optimizations?

It doesn't force, it only uses those if you don't specify any yourself
AFAIK (at least, that's the normal way to do it)

FWIW, this was what Red Hat Linux used up to and including 6.2 - it
increases performance on almost every chip, it runs everywhere, it
goes with any gcc.

--
Trond Eivind Glomsr�d
Red Hat, Inc.

* Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> [001114 15:47]:

* Trond Eivind Glomsr�d <teg@redhat.com> [001114 13:45] wrote:

Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> writes:

Anyone care if I build a patch to kill the -m486 type options in the
following files:

$ grep -i -- 486 *
bsdi: i?86) CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -m486";;
freebsd:CFLAGS='-O2 -m486 -pipe'
univel:CFLAGS='-v -O -K i486,host,inline,loop_unroll -Dsvr4'

Why would you want to? Not all gccs support -mpentium/mpentiumpro etc.

The idea is to remove it entirely (I hope) not add even more arch
specific compile flags.

Bingo... I want the USER to be able to specify it, not our template.

LER

--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 972-414-9812 (voice) Internet: ler@lerctr.org
US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749

* Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> [001114 13:47] wrote:

* Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> [001114 15:46]:

* Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> [001114 13:42] wrote:

Anyone care if I build a patch to kill the -m486 type options in the
following files:

$ grep -i -- 486 *
bsdi: i?86) CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -m486";;
freebsd:CFLAGS='-O2 -m486 -pipe'
univel:CFLAGS='-v -O -K i486,host,inline,loop_unroll -Dsvr4'
$ pwd
/home/ler/pg-dev/pgsql/src/template
$

I have a patch pending for FreeBSD to support alpha builds that
also disables -m486 so if you left the freebsd template alone it
would be ok.

I have a P-III, I don't want the template to specify it *AT ALL*.
(this is on FreeBSD 4.2-BETA).

My patches set i386-FreeBSD to -O2 and alpha-FreeBSD to -O, no
worries.

It seems like GCC does the right (or mostly right) thing without
the -m option....

heh. :)

--
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."

teg@redhat.com (Trond Eivind Glomsr�d) writes:

Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> writes:

* Trond Eivind Glomsr?d <teg@redhat.com> [001114 15:43]:

Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> writes:

Anyone care if I build a patch to kill the -m486 type options in the
following files:

$ grep -i -- 486 *
bsdi: i?86) CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -m486";;
freebsd:CFLAGS='-O2 -m486 -pipe'
univel:CFLAGS='-v -O -K i486,host,inline,loop_unroll -Dsvr4'

Why would you want to? Not all gccs support -mpentium/mpentiumpro etc.

I would remove it entirely.

Why should a package FORCE 486 or any other processor optimizations?

It doesn't force, it only uses those if you don't specify any yourself
AFAIK (at least, that's the normal way to do it)

FWIW, this was what Red Hat Linux used up to and including 6.2 - it
increases performance on almost every chip, it runs everywhere, it
goes with any gcc.

To clarify - this is on IA32 only, of course. OSes know running on
more chips should get separate entries, like Linux does.
--
Trond Eivind Glomsr�d
Red Hat, Inc.

Hi ,

I would like to increase perfomance of PG 7.02 on i486,
where can I read about this ? May be there is any flags for
postgres ?

Thanks.

Igor

* igor <igor_kh@mailru.com> [001114 20:46] wrote:

Hi ,

I would like to increase perfomance of PG 7.02 on i486,
where can I read about this ? May be there is any flags for
postgres ?

Check your C compiler's manpage for the relevant optimization
flags, be aware that some compilers can emit broken code when
pushed to thier highest optimization levels.

--
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."

Larry Rosenman writes:

Anyone care if I build a patch to kill the -m486 type options in the
following files:

$ grep -i -- 486 *
bsdi: i?86) CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -m486";;
freebsd:CFLAGS='-O2 -m486 -pipe'
univel:CFLAGS='-v -O -K i486,host,inline,loop_unroll -Dsvr4'

I couldn't say I like these options, because they seem arbitrary, but
given that it only affects the 0 univel users and the 3 bsdi users left
(freebsd will be fixed), I wouldn't make a fuzz.

I do feel more strongly about removing '-pipe', but it's not something I'm
going to pursue.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://yi.org/peter-e/

* Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> [001115 08:15] wrote:

I couldn't say I like these options, because they seem arbitrary, but
given that it only affects the 0 univel users and the 3 bsdi users left
(freebsd will be fixed), I wouldn't make a fuzz.

BSDi still has a market niche, and they are actively porting to
more platforms.

I do feel more strongly about removing '-pipe', but it's not something I'm
going to pursue.

Why?

--
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."

* Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> [001115 08:15] wrote:

I couldn't say I like these options, because they seem arbitrary, but
given that it only affects the 0 univel users and the 3 bsdi users left
(freebsd will be fixed), I wouldn't make a fuzz.

BSDi still has a market niche, and they are actively porting to
more platforms.

The template/bsdi file has:

case $host_cpu in
i?86) CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -m486";;
esac

Leave to BSDI to do it right. :-)

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026