Forum > Windows
optimized sources
Jason G:
--- Quote from: seti_britta on 30 Nov 2007, 08:08:10 pm ---Working now on a vectorized version of chirpfft.cpp
heinz ;D
--- End quote ---
Hi Heinz, I'm now on holidays :D, Are you looking at this one? I am trying to get reoriented after finishing study/work for the year, and am recovering after some serious celebrations :D. It's time to catch up!
Jason
(PS, I been raised to code wizard so I've been reading more of the private areas, I think some of the stuff we've been trying out to force the autovectoriser has some real relevance and we maybe should start a thread about it there)
_heinz:
Hi Jason,
had not have time the last days.... think we should equalize our codes first, if you are agree using the new programm structure I will upload all and if it is done PM you.
heinz
Jason G:
Hi Heinz,
Sounds like a good idea, PM when ready, take your time, no rush :D. For a comparative baseline reference, I have a functional 2.4V noGFX build with xN switches now. It was tough finding a suitable Boincapi svn revision to build against because of much restructuring of random 'utils' and gfx classes between ~august 'til now. [Investigating some unresolved externals actually led me to posts made by Simon back about July, on Beta, regarding the same sets of unresolved externals]. I think we should decide if we want to fix at a certain Boinc API svn revision (less work but may break), or build against the HEAD (lots more work...).
One initial feeling I get from that experience is any improvements that involve cutting out unnecessary boinc interface, and remove some of the basic string, memory and utility functions away from boincapi --> back towards OS/app might stabilise some of those issues (As these elements seem to be in constant flux in boincapi)....Yes I'm aware that's the exact opposite feeling an api library is supposed to generate [stability and solidity]. Of course a stripped down minimalist 'version' might constitute its own branch.... Just ideas. [Might be an idea to make the required utility functions in our own lib, maybe allowing us to drop some boincapi .h & .c references completely, removing dependancy on the revision... e.g. 'str_util.c' & 'str_util.h'.. do we really need to use boinc's version of this?...]
Jason
_heinz:
I like the idea of a stripped down minimalist version, but we should eleminate not necessary code with #ifdef directives, in connection with the use of include files for variants, as I have done it with USE_PFLOOP etc. , because it is important to have still one sourcecode, from which we can generate all necessary programmversions for the different cpu´s.
'str_util.c' & 'str_util.h'.. do we really need to use boinc's version of this?...] is a question for Joe
surprise... we are codewizards, ::) who does it ?
heinz
Jason G:
Yay, I feel special too.. I believe It was 'The Lunatic Mods of Chickenness" calling on the Holy Powers of the "Knights Who Say Ni!"
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version