| |
Compyx
Registered: Jan 2005
Posts: 631 |
Release id #154516 : Subsizer 0.5
Better to take this to the forum.
After adding some printf() statements to track the file open failure with "some demo.prg", the quoting of arguments works, but only sometimes. Which usually indicates a deeper problem somewhere.
Running through valgrind I get same nasty messages:
compyx@asus-p5k:~$ valgrind bin/subsizer "music demo.prg"
==25408== Memcheck, a memory error detector
==25408== Copyright (C) 2002-2015, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al.
==25408== Using Valgrind-3.12.0.SVN and LibVEX; rerun with -h for copyright info
==25408== Command: bin/subsizer music\ demo.prg
==25408==
argv[0] = 'bin/subsizer'
argv[1] = 'music demo.prg'
build matches...
==25408== Warning: set address range perms: large range [0x395f8040, 0x98bd9040) (undefined)
...0.49 s
optimizing matches...
==25408== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
==25408== at 0x10B6F4: cost_enc (in /home/compyx/bin/subsizer)
==25408== by 0x10C020: crunch_normal_int.isra.1 (in /home/compyx/bin/subsizer)
==25408== by 0x109818: main (in /home/compyx/bin/subsizer)
==25408==
5264 (left 70.84%)
0000113235660150,1112,1010122424555667,222233346666789A,132223234566679C
==25408== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
==25408== at 0x4C31CC2: __memcmp_sse4_1 (vg_replace_strmem.c:1094)
==25408== by 0x10C4B4: crunch_normal_int.isra.1 (in /home/compyx/bin/subsizer)
==25408== by 0x109818: main (in /home/compyx/bin/subsizer)
==25408==
==25408== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
==25408== at 0x4C31CFD: __memcmp_sse4_1 (vg_replace_strmem.c:1094)
==25408== by 0x10C4B4: crunch_normal_int.isra.1 (in /home/compyx/bin/subsizer)
==25408== by 0x109818: main (in /home/compyx/bin/subsizer)
==25408==
==25408== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
==25408== at 0x10C4B7: crunch_normal_int.isra.1 (in /home/compyx/bin/subsizer)
==25408== by 0x109818: main (in /home/compyx/bin/subsizer)
==25408==
4899 (left 65.93%)
0000113235660150,1112,1010122332456667,222323346666789A,132223234566679C
4897 (left 65.90%)
0000113235660150,1112,1010122332456667,222323346666789A,132223234566679C
==25408== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
==25408== at 0x4C31CD6: __memcmp_sse4_1 (vg_replace_strmem.c:1094)
==25408== by 0x10C4B4: crunch_normal_int.isra.1 (in /home/compyx/bin/subsizer)
==25408== by 0x109818: main (in /home/compyx/bin/subsizer)
==25408==
...2.02 s
==25408== Warning: set address range perms: large range [0x395f8028, 0x98bd9058) (noaccess)
generating output...
...0.02 s
packed 7431 bytes into 4897 bytes
verifed 7431 bytes...ok
==25408==
==25408== HEAP SUMMARY:
==25408== in use at exit: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==25408== total heap usage: 101 allocs, 101 frees, 1,624,666,687 bytes allocated
==25408==
==25408== All heap blocks were freed -- no leaks are possible
==25408==
==25408== For counts of detected and suppressed errors, rerun with: -v
==25408== Use --track-origins=yes to see where uninitialised values come from
==25408== ERROR SUMMARY: 6 errors from 5 contexts (suppressed: 0 from 0)
I tried using --track-origins=yes, but that completely borked my system, that filled my memory and my swap space and made my system completely unresponsive, had to kill valgrind via a tty.
Is there bug a tracker somewhere for this? |
|
... 18 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
ChristopherJam
Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1377 |
Quoting tlrI have these for subsizer 0.5:
No decruncher speeds as there is no standalone decruncher yet.
Curious question: are we measuring those in cycles without badlines?
Thanks! Yes, time in cycles with neither badlines nor interrupts, either by using CIA or breakpoints+cyclecounter in VICE. |
| |
ChristopherJam
Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1377 |
Also, wow - those are tiny!
Even smaller than exomizer. I really need to time those two... |
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1627 |
Well, if you call yourself The Leader, you need to be second to none! |
| |
ChristopherJam
Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1377 |
Scatter plot's up at http://www.codebase64.org/doku.php?id=base:compression_benchmar.. :) |
| |
tlr
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 1714 |
I wanted to replicate some of the results as a baseline but can't really get the same values.
This is what I get for lzwvl-f: name size left cycles frm spd cons
pfp1.bin: 4529 (18) 41.14% 234334 11.9 45.2k/s 51.7c/b
pfp2.bin: 3532 (14) 71.02% 127774 6.5 37.4k/s 36.2c/b
pfp3.bin: 2991 (12) 75.74% 95420 4.9 39.8k/s 31.9c/b
pfp4.bin: 4242 (17) 60.46% 153715 7.8 43.9k/s 36.2c/b
pfp5.bin: 25781 (102) 74.17% 730916 37.2 45.8k/s 28.4c/b
pfp6.bin: 11283 (45) 35.70% 644479 32.8 47.2k/s 57.1c/b
pfp7.bin: 12108 (48) 59.38% 466960 23.8 42.0k/s 38.6c/b
pfp8.bin: 4179 (17) 73.15% 142155 7.2 38.7k/s 34.0c/b
pfp9.bin: 6914 (28) 77.17% 226119 11.5 38.1k/s 32.7c/bThe cycle count is slightly off, presumably due to obscure timing model errors in unp64 which I'm using to emulate the depacker. I verified the timing in vice for a few and the error for those was about 1% or so.
Note especially the difference between pfp6.bin and pfp7.bin.
The last value is cycles per byte _consumed_ as in the tables. Is this really a useful measure? |
| |
tlr
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 1714 |
Teaser: name size left cycles frm spd cons
pfp1.bin: 2961 (12) 26.90% 751339 38.2 14.1k/s 253.7c/b
pfp2.bin: 2201 (9) 44.26% 432794 22.0 11.1k/s 196.6c/b
pfp3.bin: 1786 (8) 45.23% 321693 16.4 11.8k/s 180.1c/b
pfp4.bin: 3438 (14) 49.00% 638705 32.5 10.6k/s 185.8c/b
pfp5.bin: 19631 (78) 56.48% 3642024 185.3 9.2k/s 185.5c/b
pfp6.bin: 8407 (34) 26.60% 1864843 94.9 16.3k/s 221.8c/b
pfp7.bin: 8768 (35) 43.00% 1725244 87.8 11.4k/s 196.8c/b
pfp8.bin: 3086 (13) 54.02% 520012 26.5 10.6k/s 168.5c/b
pfp9.bin: 5313 (21) 59.30% 973471 49.5 8.9k/s 183.2c/b
There are many optimizations left to be done. It will use a temporary buffer of slightly less than a page though. This can of course be overwritten between decrunches. |
| |
ChristopherJam
Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1377 |
Ooh, nice. Already considerably faster than Exomizer, which is the only other cruncher in the same ballpark for ratio.
I was thinking cycles per byte consumed might be a useful metric for impedance matching with fastloaders, especially if you're streaming. |
| |
tlr
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 1714 |
Quoting ChristopherJamI was thinking cycles per byte consumed might be a useful metric for impedance matching with fastloaders, especially if you're streaming.
Good point!
I'll be away for a week+ now so will be starting with a fresh mind then and see what I can come up with. |
| |
ChristopherJam
Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1377 |
I've updated the scatter plot and tables at codebase.
Article here if that image link fails. |
| |
j0x
Registered: Mar 2004
Posts: 215 |
Interesting! Have you considered adding benchmark data from the Card Cruncher or other tools based purely on entropy encoding? |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 - Next |
