On Thu, 25 Aug 2022, Lubos Kocman wrote:
Hello openSUSE!
Talking about benchmarks, I spoke with Product Management earlier today, and we want to have data. PM seems to be expecting a larger gain than I see mentioned here.
So the plan is to run a benchmark with some test suite (perhaps https://www.phoronix-test-suite.com/ ?).
As of now, SUSE:ALP does not seem to be built with any -v3 flags. Once this is the case, we can use such an image and compare it to, e.g., v1-based TW minimal install. I expect that this will be later in September.
The main reason for this is that devel:LEO (sic) has no way to be distinguished from Factory (yet) when building GCC and the project config wasn't changed to make the change at the Optflags level either.
Another outcome: We have to have a community -v3 ALP image, to support the non-paid to paid "seamless" migration use case for ALP. As mentioned before, PM doesn't block us from Rebuilding ALP as v1 or v2 in an openSUSE:Step- like fashion (this was also discussed on Rel-eng call two weeks ago or similar).
Doug also had an idea to ask via survey@ who has -v3 hw available etc. So perhaps that would help.
Investing into -v2 ALP rebuild will take some effort, and I want to make sure that such investment is backed with data and also understand the gain, etc.
The gain that we can't measure is the downstream one - ISVs and
users building their products with a more sensible default setting
for modern hardware. I fully expect OSS software to be optimized
where it is important, but I have less hope for the rest where
people rely on magic compilers (ICC -aX-me-harder, something GCC
doesn't provide for good reason).
The gain for our own product is probably as much (or more) marketing
as performance gains.
Richard.
--
Richard Biener