[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] Need help to figure out where this strange performan
From: |
Jörg F . Wittenberger |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] Need help to figure out where this strange performance impact is coming from |
Date: |
Thu, 14 Jan 2016 11:30:19 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux armv7l; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/38.4.0 |
Tried that too: on AMD64 (Debian) chicken 4.10.1 from tarball does NOT
give any difference.
But even if it may be an ARM related problem: how is it even possible??!
Am 14.01.2016 um 11:10 schrieb Jörg F. Wittenberger:
> Am 13.01.2016 um 21:46 schrieb Christian Kellermann:
>> * Christian Kellermann <address@hidden> [160113 21:44]:
>>> * Jörg F. Wittenberger <address@hidden> [160113 12:38]:
>>>> yesterday I found that simply having a (use mailbox) in some code had a
>>>> huge impact (more than a factor of 3) at the performance of the
>>>> resulting executable. Without using the mailbox stuff at all.
>>>>
>>>> Meanwhile I figured out that this has nothing at all to do with the
>>>> mailbox egg. But _all_ with the use of srfi-1.
>>>
>>> Hm which OS and architecture are you running this on? On my OpenBSD
>>> amd64 system the two versions do fluctuate but are indistinguishable
>>> when run a couple hundred times.
>
> Really?! Commenting out this (use srfi-1) does not make a difference
> there? Strange!
>
> I just double-checked with chicken rev 022dce82 (master built
> yesterday). (Before I used rev 274e7afa.)
>
> Additionally I tried now chicken 4.10.1 built from the tarball
> distributed from call-cc.org. (I moved the installed version out of the
> way for this test.)
>
> All the same result: slowdown of roughly 4x (160:40).
>
> OS: Debian stretch, ARMv7 Processor rev 10
>
> Another try: Raspberry Pi, Raspberian. Similar results, about 60:20
>
>>> I have used CHICKEN Version 4.10.1 (rev f36c19c) and compiled with
>>> default options.
>
> Used default option this time. (But see source - contains some
> declarations).
>
>> Also -O5 does not make any difference.
>
> Same here. Same strange slowdown.
>
> Anybody else having another platform to try on? An ARM-related problem?
>
>