Loading
Optimization in GCC
Here's what the O options mean in GCC, why some optimizations aren't optimal after all and how you can make specialized optimization choices for your application.
The optimizations discussed thus far can yield significant improvements in software performance and object size, but specifying the target architecture also can yield meaningful benefits. The -march option of gcc allows the CPU type to be specified (Table 2).
Table 2. x86 Architectures
| Target CPU Types | -march= Type |
|---|---|
| i386 DX/SX/CX/EX/SL | i386 |
| i486 DX/SX/DX2/SL/SX2/DX4 | i486 |
| 487 | i486 |
| Pentium | pentium |
| Pentium MMX | pentium-mmx |
| Pentium Pro | pentiumpro |
| Pentium II | pentium2 |
| Celeron | pentium2 |
| Pentium III | pentium3 |
| Pentium 4 | pentium4 |
| Via C3 | c3 |
| Winchip 2 | winchip2 |
| Winchip C6-2 | winchip-c6 |
| AMD K5 | i586 |
| AMD K6 | k6 |
| AMD K6 II | k6-2 |
| AMD K6 III | k6-3 |
| AMD Athlon | athlon |
| AMD Athlon 4 | athlon |
| AMD Athlon XP/MP | athlon |
| AMD Duron | athlon |
| AMD Tbird | athlon-tbird |
The default architecture is i386. GCC runs on all other i386/x86 architectures, but it can result in degraded performance on more recent processors. If you're concerned about portability of an image, you should compile it with the default. If you're more interested in performance, pick the architecture that matches your own.
Let's now look at an example of how performance can be improved by focusing on the actual target. Let's build a simple test application that performs a bubble sort over 10,000 elements. The elements in the array have been reversed to force the worst-case scenario. The build and timing process is shown in Listing 1.
By specifying the architecture, in this case a 633MHz Celeron, the compiler can generate instructions for the particular target as well as enable other optimizations available only to that target. As shown in Listing 1, by specifying the architecture we see a time benefit of 237ms (23% improvement).
Although Listing 1 shows an improvement in speed, the drawback is that the image is slightly larger. Using the size command (Listing 2), we can identify the sizes of the various sections of the image.
From Listing 2, we can see that the instruction size (text section) of the image increased by 28 bytes. But in this example, it's a small price to pay for the speed benefit.
Some specialized optimizations require explicit definition by the developer. These optimizations are specific to the i386 and x86 architectures. A math unit, for one, can be specified, although in many cases it is automatically defined based on the specification of a target architecture. Possible units for the -mfpmath= option are shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Math Unit Optimizations
| Option | Description |
|---|---|
| 387 | Standard 387 Floating Point Coprocessor |
| sse | Streaming SIMD Extensions (Pentium III, Athlon 4/XP/MP) |
| sse2 | Streaming SIMD Extensions II (Pentium 4) |
The default choice is -mfpmath=387. An experimental option is to specify both sse and 387 (-mfpmath=sse,387), which attempts to use both units.
______________________
Webcast
How to Build an Optimal Hadoop Cluster to Store and Maintain Unlimited Amounts of Data Using Microservers
Realizing the promise of Apache® Hadoop® requires the effective deployment of compute, memory, storage and networking to achieve optimal results. With its flexibility and multitude of options, it is easy to over or under provision the server infrastructure, resulting in poor performance and high TCO. Join us for an in depth, technical discussion with industry experts from leading Hadoop and server companies who will provide insights into the key considerations for designing and deploying an optimal Hadoop cluster.
Sponsored by AMD
White Paper
Red Hat White Paper: Using an Open Source Framework to Catch the Bad Guy
Built-in forensics, incident response, and security with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Every security policy provides guidance and requirements for ensuring adequate protection of information and data, as well as high-level technical and administrative security requirements for a system in a given environment. Traditionally, providing security for a system focuses on the confidentiality of the information on it. However, protecting the data integrity and system and data availability is just as important. For example, when processing United States intelligence information, there are three attributes that require protection: confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
Learn more about catching the bad guy in this free white paper.
Sponsored by DLT Solutions
- RSS Feeds
- Dynamic DNS—an Object Lesson in Problem Solving
- Making Linux and Android Get Along (It's Not as Hard as It Sounds)
- Using Salt Stack and Vagrant for Drupal Development
- New Products
- A Topic for Discussion - Open Source Feature-Richness?
- Validate an E-Mail Address with PHP, the Right Way
- Drupal Is a Framework: Why Everyone Needs to Understand This
- What's the tweeting protocol?
- Tech Tip: Really Simple HTTP Server with Python
- Kernel Problem
39 min 21 sec ago - BASH script to log IPs on public web server
5 hours 6 min ago - DynDNS
8 hours 42 min ago - Reply to comment | Linux Journal
9 hours 14 min ago - All the articles you talked
11 hours 38 min ago - All the articles you talked
11 hours 41 min ago - All the articles you talked
11 hours 42 min ago - myip
16 hours 7 min ago - Keeping track of IP address
17 hours 58 min ago - Roll your own dynamic dns
23 hours 11 min ago
Enter to Win an Adafruit Pi Cobbler Breakout Kit for Raspberry Pi
It's Raspberry Pi month at Linux Journal. Each week in May, Adafruit will be giving away a Pi-related prize to a lucky, randomly drawn LJ reader. Winners will be announced weekly.
Fill out the fields below to enter to win this week's prize-- a Pi Cobbler Breakout Kit for Raspberry Pi.
Congratulations to our winners so far:
- 5-8-13, Pi Starter Pack: Jack Davis
- 5-15-13, Pi Model B 512MB RAM: Patrick Dunn
- 5-21-13, Prototyping Pi Plate Kit: Philip Kirby
- Next winner announced on 5-27-13!
Free Webinar: Hadoop
How to Build an Optimal Hadoop Cluster to Store and Maintain Unlimited Amounts of Data Using Microservers
Realizing the promise of Apache® Hadoop® requires the effective deployment of compute, memory, storage and networking to achieve optimal results. With its flexibility and multitude of options, it is easy to over or under provision the server infrastructure, resulting in poor performance and high TCO. Join us for an in depth, technical discussion with industry experts from leading Hadoop and server companies who will provide insights into the key considerations for designing and deploying an optimal Hadoop cluster.
Some of key questions to be discussed are:
- What is the “typical” Hadoop cluster and what should be installed on the different machine types?
- Why should you consider the typical workload patterns when making your hardware decisions?
- Are all microservers created equal for Hadoop deployments?
- How do I plan for expansion if I require more compute, memory, storage or networking?
Developer Poll
Comments
hi, follow the "Listing 3.
hi, follow the "Listing 3. Simple Example of gprof" but when using -O or -O2, the profile is "Flat profile".So how to resoult it?
my step is:
1: gcc -o test_optimization test_optimization.c -pg -march=i386
2: ./test_optimization
3: gprof --no-graph -b ./test_optimization gmon.out
4: the result is:
Flat profile:
Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds.
no time accumulated
% cumulative self self total
time seconds seconds calls Ts/call Ts/call name
0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 factorial
if add -O2， the result is:
Flat profile:
Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds.
no time accumulated
% cumulative self self total
time seconds seconds calls Ts/call Ts/call name
single optimization flag without level
Any optimization can be enabled outside of any level simply by specifying its name with the -f prefix, as:
gcc -fdefer-pop -o test test.cIn current versions of GCC it is incorrect ( http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/FAQ#optimization-options ). Single optimization flag without optimization level doesn't work. I don't know what about old versions.
gcc 4.2.3 vs visual c 2005
hello:
I just compiled a code under gcc cygwin and visual c 2005 in a lpatop with dula core intel processor.
The debuggable gcc code was about 2x times than faster than visual c++ debuggable code
however the situation reversed when i used O3 optimization in gcc and "release" optimization in visual c.
now the visual c code is 2x faster than gcc.
i did not expect that large a difference; it is HUGE!!
am i missin gsomehting or anybody else has noticed similar thing?
visual c++ optimizations
apparentely, MSVC uses a few insecure optimizations counting that the developer created a secure code. Probably thats why its debug build is slower.
I've seen lots of situations where gcc code gives a error right away, and promptly showing me and bug and MSVC happily executing a code until it finally stumble upon a non-static field of a class and finally giving a error. For me , this is simple misleading and thats why I prefer gcc
Detailed article, that is great!
You wrote very detailedly!
It is really useful for me right now since I am doing my thesis work on optimization under Linux. Thank your so much!
Someone should write some
Someone should write some "C" code and a few scripts that will enable / disable every compiler option and then print out which options worked best for _your_ particular system.
A benchmark that would specifically test each option (as opposed to using a single benchmark, and huge) could be written.
EG: no point in benchmarking if we should use:
gcc -O2 -O3 code.c -- One disables the other
gcc -fno-gcse SSE2_code.c
Benchmarks need to have a 'large' effect on the option that is being switched.
This could be ran overnight (or on multiple machines, each doing part of the testing) and results provided on a web page somewhere.
Experts could put in thier two cents and a wiki of snipperts could
be fed into a code compilator (not compiler, just a bunch of scripts) that would compilate all the snippets and produce a final program to be compiled on many different machines.
This way we could figure out that if we had such-and-such a system then "how-often" (what % of the time) would we simply be better off
to use a particular option and when is it more likely based on that TYPE of program we are running (wordprocessor vs. MultiMedia app).
EG: If you have a Pentium is is ALWAYS (or should be if gcc is correct) best to use the -march=pentium option - BUT - it is NOT always best to use "-fcrossjumping" (though it _could_ be for certain applications).
The output of all this could simply be a half dozen command line choices for each processor - including a "general purpose 'best'" setting and a "quick compile with great optimization" setting (for intermediate builds).
This is something that a few dozen people need to work on to get the ball rolling and then the rest of us need to pitch in and compile the resulting test scripts to check for errors. With everyone's help we should have the so-called answer(S) to "which compilation options should I use for machine-X when compiling applcation=category Y.
Just a thought ...
Looks like you have a good
Looks like you have a good project to setup now.
Got Table?
Where can I get a readable copy of Table 1? The copy here is too small to read, and can't be enlarged.
try clicking on it
try clicking on it
-O versus -O0
Minor comment -- -O defaults to -O1, not to -O0.