Gentoo Archives: gentoo-science

From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@×××××××.net>
To: gentoo-science@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-science] [Fwd: [atlas-devel] 3.7.31 and threading problem]
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 19:58:16
Message-Id: 464E0520.1080007@cesmail.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-science] [Fwd: [atlas-devel] 3.7.31 and threading problem] by Markus Dittrich
1 Markus Dittrich wrote:
2 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
3 > Hash: SHA1
4 >
5 > On Fri, 18 May 2007, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
6 >
7 >> Is this applicable to the Gentoo ebuilds?
8 >>
9 >
10 > Hi Ed,
11 >
12 > What exactly are you referring to? The part about
13 > ATL_MaxMalloc? If so, I haven't done any benchmarking
14 > yet, but I don't see a problem increasing this
15 > value to 160M as suggested by Clint.
16 >
17 > cheers,
18 > Markus
19 >
20 >
21 > - -- Markus Dittrich (markusle)
22 > Gentoo Linux Developer
23 > Scientific applications
24 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
25 > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
26 >
27 > iD8DBQFGTf8txlRwCwb7k40RAmfSAJ9r5K/RD+4rxJbFm7NDH+ONWoy1ZwCeKLNL
28 > y0jHAOSCmQI+V5mKzcWsjcE=
29 > =LpY6
30 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
31 Yeah ... I just got an Athlon64 X2 4200+ and the first thing I did when
32 I got the machine stabilized was build "blas-atlas" and "lapack-atlas"
33 (3.7.30). New versions of Atlas generally show up in Portage or the
34 science overlay within a day after Clint releases them, so I don't
35 usually test the upstream source.
36
37 The best I got out of my machine was something like 7 GFLOPS on a 32-bit
38 test with 3.7.30, and there were some cases that looked like they should
39 have done better. So I definitely want to test this 160M setting.
40 --
41 gentoo-science@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-science] [Fwd: [atlas-devel] 3.7.31 and threading problem] Markus Dittrich <markusle@g.o>