[Arm-netbook] RedSleeve - New ARM Linux Distro

[cnxsoft]

On 13/04/2012 15:18, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> cnxsoft wrote:
>> On 13/04/2012 04:53, Gordan Bobic wrote:
>>> On 12/04/2012 22:27, Henrik Nordström wrote:
>>>> mån 2012-03-26 klockan 09:38 +0100 skrev Gordan Bobic:
>>>>
>>>>> Have you actually looked at what the realistic performance advantage is
>>>>> on something like a Tegra2 between running armv5tel and armv7hl for a
>>>>> typical desktop workload?
>>>> I have not tried them in desktop setup, but in batch compile performance
>>>> difference there is a very noticeable difference between Tegra2 running
>>>> armv5tel or Tegra2 running armv7hl for any larger compile job even when
>>>> running the same kernel.
>>> Can you put a number on that over a few different tasks, e.g. a 100
>>> loops of bzip2 of a 100MB file generated from /dev/random going to
>>> /dev/null and 100 iterations of compiling something small in tmpfs?
>>>
>>> "Very noticeable" isn't very scientific. :)
>>>
>>> Gordan
>>>
>> Phoronix compared Ubuntu 11.10 (soft-float) against Ubuntu 12.04
>> (hard-float) on the Pandaboard.
>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ubuntu_1204_armhf&num=3
>>
>> This is also not very scientific, as other optimizations may have
>> improved performances, but still worth a look.
> It is also not even clear that 12.04 is hard-float - both list kernels
> as armv7l, rather than armv7hl. The test where I'd have expected to see
> no difference (gzip compression isn't exactly very FP heavy) has one of
> the biggest differences. So I'm not convinced how relevant the results
> are to a relative performance assessment of SF vs. HF - at a glance it
> seems more plausible the differences come from optimizations in the
> packages themselves and possibly a better compiler toolchain.
>
I'm 100% sure Ubuntu 12.04 is using hard-float, for the rest I agree.