[HPGMG Forum] Do we want the benchmark to go into intrinsics?

Mark Adams mfadams at lbl.gov
Tue Apr 29 17:24:17 UTC 2014

On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Sam Williams <swwilliams at lbl.gov> wrote:

> Bad compilers should be shamed.  Having it autodetect __bgq__ (or
> whetever) and run the best manually optimized implementation by defaults
> hides deficiencies.
Humm, we really need to get on the same page with the HPGMG model and
philosophy.  I will be in Berkeley Thursday all day and probably Wed PM.

We can start this with email perhaps.

Vendors have to be able to use whatever the heck they want so what is the
difference if Jed writes the BGQ kernels or John Gunnells?  John has to
contribute it to the repo anyway so the only difference is who shows up
with "blame" and when it gets released if John want to wait until the code
is used for a Top500 list and is thus what we are calling "published" and
must be made public.  At least this is the model that I had in mind.  You
seem to have a different model.  We could keep some definition of optimized
in branches perhaps ...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://hpgmg.org/lists/archives/hpgmg-forum/attachments/20140429/8a3fad19/attachment.html>

More information about the HPGMG-Forum mailing list