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
$


-- 
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

Tue, 14 Nov 2000 15:41:15 -0600
Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>
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 Glomsrï¿½d
Red Hat, Inc.

14 Nov 2000 16:43:20 -0500
teg@redhat.com (Trond Eivind =?iso-8859-1?q?Glomsr=F8d?=)
Re: 486 Optimizations...
* 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 Glomsrï¿½d
> 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

Tue, 14 Nov 2000 15:44:43 -0600
Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>
Re: 486 Optimizations...
* 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."

Tue, 14 Nov 2000 13:46:10 -0800
Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
Re: 486 Optimizations...
* Trond Eivind Glomsrï¿½d <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."

Tue, 14 Nov 2000 13:47:09 -0800
Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
Re: 486 Optimizations...
* 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

Tue, 14 Nov 2000 15:47:51 -0600
Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>
Re: 486 Optimizations...
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 Glomsrï¿½d
Red Hat, Inc.

14 Nov 2000 16:48:17 -0500
teg@redhat.com (Trond Eivind =?iso-8859-1?q?Glomsr=F8d?=)
Re: 486 Optimizations...
* Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> [001114 15:47]:
> * Trond Eivind Glomsrï¿½d <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

Tue, 14 Nov 2000 15:48:55 -0600
Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>
Re: 486 Optimizations...
* 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."

Tue, 14 Nov 2000 13:50:13 -0800
Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
Re: 486 Optimizations...
teg@redhat.com (Trond Eivind Glomsrï¿½d) 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 Glomsrï¿½d
Red Hat, Inc.

14 Nov 2000 16:56:23 -0500
teg@redhat.com (Trond Eivind =?iso-8859-1?q?Glomsr=F8d?=)
Re: 486 Optimizations...
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



Wed, 15 Nov 2000 07:42:04 +0300
igor <igor_kh@mailru.com>
One more 486 Optimizations...
* 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."

Tue, 14 Nov 2000 22:02:52 -0800
Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
Re: One more 486 Optimizations...
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/


Wed, 15 Nov 2000 17:19:02 +0100 (CET)
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Re: 486 Optimizations...
* 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."

Wed, 15 Nov 2000 09:04:42 -0800
Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
Re: 486 Optimizations...
> * 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

Thu, 16 Nov 2000 00:28:21 -0500 (EST)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: 486 Optimizations...