Garbo/Garbo.cdr/pc/source/dhrys.zoo/dhrys.2

Text File | 1990-02-21 | 39.6 KB | 1,019 lines

#! /bin/sh
# This is a shell archive.  Remove anything before this line, then unpack
# it by saving it into a file and typing "sh file".  To overwrite existing
# files, type "sh file -c".  You can also feed this as standard input via
# unshar, or by typing "sh <file", e.g..  If this archive is complete, you
# will see the following message at the end:
#        "End of shell archive."
# Contents:  Makefile RATIONALE README README.RER clarify.doc
#   pure2_1.dif submit.frm
# Wrapped by web@kivax on Mon Feb 12 07:45:32 1990
PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/ucb ; export PATH
if test -f Makefile -a "${1}" != "-c" ; then
  echo shar: Will not over-write existing file \"Makefile\"
else
echo shar: Extracting \"Makefile\" \(3956 characters\)
sed "s/^X//" >Makefile <<'END_OF_Makefile'
X#
X#    Adjust for your system!
X#
X#    Common options for generic UNIX and Microsoft C (under DOS)
X#    are listed here.  You can change them by switching the order,
X#    placing the ones you want last.  Pay particular attention to
X#    the HZ parameter, which may or may not be listed in some
X#    header file on your system, such as <sys/param.h> or <limits.h>
X#    (as CLK_TCK).  Even if it is listed, it may be incorrect.
X#    Also, some operating systems (notably some (all?) versions
X#    of Microport UNIX) lie about the time.  Sanity check with a
X#    stopwatch.
X#
X#    For Microsoft C under DOS, you need a real make, not MSC make,
X#    to run this Makefile.  The public domain "ndmake" will suffice.
X#
XCC=        cl            # C compiler name goes here (MSC)
XCC=        cc            # C compiler name goes here (UNIX)
X
XPROGS=        msc            # Programs to build (MSC)
XPROGS=        unix            # Programs to build (UNIX)
X
XTIME_FUNC=    -DMSC_CLOCK        # Use Microsoft clock() for measurement
XTIME_FUNC=    -DTIME            # Use time(2) for measurement
XTIME_FUNC=    -DTIMES            # Use times(2) for measurement
XHZ=        50            # Frequency of times(2) clock ticks
XHZ=        60            # Frequency of times(2) clock ticks
XHZ=        100            # Frequency of times(2) clock ticks
XHZ=        1            # Give bogus result unless changed!
X
XSTRUCTASSIGN=    -DNOSTRUCTASSIGN    # Compiler cannot assign structs
XSTRUCTASSIGN=                # Compiler can assign structs
X
XENUMS=        -DNOENUMS        # Compiler doesn't have enum type
XENUMS=                    # Compiler does have enum type
X
XOPTIMIZE=    -Ox -G2            # Optimization Level (MSC, 80286)
XOPTIMIZE=    -O            # Optimization Level (generic UNIX)
X
XLFLAGS=                    #Loader Flags
X
XCFLAGS=    $(OPTIMIZE) $(TIME_FUNC) -DHZ=$(HZ) $(ENUMS) $(STRUCTASSIGN) $(CFL)
X
X#
X#        You shouldn't need to touch the rest
X#
XSRC=        dhry_1.c dhry_2.c
XHDR=        dhry.h
X
XUNIX_PROGS=    dry2 dry2reg
XMSC_PROGS=    sdry2.exe sdry2reg.exe mdry2.exe mdry2reg.exe \
X        ldry2.exe ldry2reg.exe cdry2.exe cdry2reg.exe \
X        hdry2.exe hdry2reg.exe
X
X# Files added by rer:
XFILES1=        README.RER clarify.doc Makefile submit.frm pure2_1.dif \
X        dhry_c.dif
X# Reinhold's files:
XFILES2=        README RATIONALE $(HDR) $(SRC)
XFILES3=        dhry.p
X
Xall:    $(PROGS)
X
Xunix:    $(UNIX_PROGS)
X
Xmsc:    $(MSC_PROGS)
X
Xdry2:        $(SRC) $(HDR)
X        $(CC) $(CFLAGS) $(SRC) $(LFLAGS) -o $@
X
Xdry2reg:    $(SRC) $(HDR)
X        $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -DREG=register $(SRC) $(LFLAGS) -o $@
X
Xsdry2.exe:    $(SRC) $(HDR)
X        $(CC) -AS $(CFLAGS) $(SRC) $(LFLAGS) -o $@
X
Xsdry2reg.exe:    $(SRC) $(HDR)
X        $(CC) -AS $(CFLAGS) -DREG=register $(SRC) $(LFLAGS) -o $@
X
Xmdry2.exe:    $(SRC) $(HDR)
X        $(CC) -AM $(CFLAGS) $(SRC) $(LFLAGS) -o $@
X
Xmdry2reg.exe:    $(SRC) $(HDR)
X        $(CC) -AM $(CFLAGS) -DREG=register $(SRC) $(LFLAGS) -o $@
X
Xldry2.exe:    $(SRC) $(HDR)
X        $(CC) -AL $(CFLAGS) $(SRC) $(LFLAGS) -o $@
X
Xldry2reg.exe:    $(SRC) $(HDR)
X        $(CC) -AL $(CFLAGS) -DREG=register $(SRC) $(LFLAGS) -o $@
X
Xcdry2.exe:    $(SRC) $(HDR)
X        $(CC) -AC $(CFLAGS) $(SRC) $(LFLAGS) -o $@
X
Xcdry2reg.exe:    $(SRC) $(HDR)
X        $(CC) -AC $(CFLAGS) -DREG=register $(SRC) $(LFLAGS) -o $@
X
Xhdry2.exe:    $(SRC) $(HDR)
X        $(CC) -AH $(CFLAGS) $(SRC) $(LFLAGS) -o $@
X
Xhdry2reg.exe:    $(SRC) $(HDR)
X        $(CC) -AH $(CFLAGS) -DREG=register $(SRC) $(LFLAGS) -o $@
X
Xshar:    dry2shar.1 dry2shar.2 dry2shar.3
X
Xdry2.arc:    $(FILES1) $(FILES2) $(FILES3)
X    arc a dry2.arc $(FILES1) $(FILES2) $(FILES3)
X
Xdry2shar.1: $(FILES1)
X    shar -vc -p X $(FILES1) >$@
X
Xdry2shar.2: $(FILES2)
X    shar -vc -p X $(FILES2) >$@
X
Xdry2shar.3: $(FILES3)
X    shar -v -p X $(FILES3) >$@
X
Xclean:
X    -rm -f *.o *.obj
X
Xclobber: clean
X    -rm -f $(UNIX_PROGS) $(MSC_PROGS) dry2shar.* dry2.arc
X
Xpost:    dry2shar.1    dry2shar.2    dry2shar.3
X    for i in 1 2 3;\
X    do\
X        cat HEADERS BOILER.$$i dry2shar.$$i |\
X        inews -h -t "Dhrystone 2.1 ($$i of 3)" -n comp.arch;\
X    done
X
Xrepost:    dry2shar.1    dry2shar.2    dry2shar.3
X    for i in 3;\
X    do\
X        cat HEADERS BOILER.$$i dry2shar.$$i |\
X        inews -h -t "REPOST: Dhrystone 2.1 ($$i of 3)" -n comp.arch;\
X    done
X
Xmail:    dry2shar.1    dry2shar.2    dry2shar.3
X    for i in 1 2 3;\
X    do\
X        cat BOILER.$$i dry2shar.$$i |\
X        mailx -s "Dhrystone 2.1 ($$i of 3)" $(ADDR);\
X    done
X
Xdos:
X    doscopy -a $(FILES1) $(FILES2) $(FILES3) dos!a:
END_OF_Makefile
if test 3956 -ne `wc -c <Makefile`; then
    echo shar: \"Makefile\" unpacked with wrong size!
fi
# end of overwriting check
fi
if test -f RATIONALE -a "${1}" != "-c" ; then
  echo shar: Will not over-write existing file \"RATIONALE\"
else
echo shar: Extracting \"RATIONALE\" \(18793 characters\)
sed "s/^X//" >RATIONALE <<'END_OF_RATIONALE'
X
X
X    Dhrystone Benchmark: Rationale for Version 2 and Measurement Rules
X
X
X                 Reinhold P. Weicker
X                 Siemens AG, E STE 35
X                 Postfach 3240
X                 D-8520 Erlangen
X                 Germany (West)
X
X
X
X
X1.  Why a Version 2 of Dhrystone?
X
XThe Dhrystone benchmark  program  [1]  has  become  a  popular  benchmark  for
XCPU/compiler   performance   measurement,   in   particular  in  the  area  of
Xminicomputers, workstations, PC's and microprocesors.  It apparently satisfies
Xa  need  for  an  easy-to-use  integer benchmark; it gives a first performance
Xindication which is more meaningful than MIPS numbers which, in their  literal
Xmeaning  (million  instructions  per  second), cannot be used across different
Xinstruction sets (e.g. RISC  vs.  CISC).   With  the  increasing  use  of  the
Xbenchmark, it seems necessary to reconsider the benchmark and to check whether
Xit can still fulfill this function.  Version 2 of Dhrystone is the  result  of
Xsuch a re-evaluation, it has been made for two reasons:
X
Xo Dhrystone has been published in Ada [1], and Versions in Ada, Pascal  and  C
X  have  been  distributed  by  Reinhold Weicker via floppy disk.  However, the
X  version that was used most often for benchmarking has been the version  made
X  by  Rick  Richardson  by another translation from the Ada version into the C
X  programming language, this has been the version  distributed  via  the  UNIX
X  network Usenet [2].
X
X  There is an obvious need for a common C version of Dhrystone, since C is  at
X  present  the  most  popular  system  programming  language  for the class of
X  systems (microcomputers, minicomputers,  workstations)  where  Dhrystone  is
X  used  most.   There  should  be,  as  far as possible, only one C version of
X  Dhrystone such that results can be compared  without  restrictions.  In  the
X  past,  the  C  versions  distributed by Rick Richardson (Version 1.1) and by
X  Reinhold Weicker had small (though not significant) differences.
X
X  Together with the new C version, the  Ada  and  Pascal  versions  have  been
X  updated as well.
X
Xo As far as it is  possible  without  changes  to  the  Dhrystone  statistics,
X  optimizing   compilers   should   be  prevented  from  removing  significant
X  statements.  It has  turned  out  in  the  past  that  optimizing  compilers
X  suppressed  code  generation for too many statements (by "dead code removal"
X  or  "dead  variable  elimination").   This  has  lead  to  the  danger  that
X  benchmarking  results obtained by a naive application of Dhrystone - without
X  inspection of the code that was generated - could become meaningless.
X
XThe  overall  policiy  for  version  2  has  been  that  the  distribution  of
Xstatements,  operand types and operand locality described in [1] should remain
Xunchanged as much as possible.  (Very few changes were necessary; their impact
Xshould be negligible.)  Also, the order of statements should remain unchanged.
XAlthough I am aware of some critical remarks on the benchmark - I  agree  with
Xseveral  of them - and know some suggestions for improvement, I didn't want to
Xchange the benchmark into something different from what has  become  known  as
X"Dhrystone"; the confusion generated by such a change would probably outweight
Xthe benefits. If I were to write a new benchmark program, I wouldn't  give  it
Xthe  name  "Dhrystone"  since  this  denotes  the  program  published  in [1].
XHowever, I do recognize  the  need  for  a  larger  number  of  representative
Xprograms  that can be used as benchmarks; users should always be encouraged to
Xuse more than just one benchmark.
X
XThe new versions (version 2.1 for C, Pascal and Ada) will  be  distributed  as
Xwidely as possible.  (Version 2.1 differs from version 2.0 distributed via the
XUNIX Network Usenet in  March  1988  only  in  a  few  corrections  for  minor
Xdeficiencies  found  by  users  of  version 2.0.)  Readers who want to use the
Xbenchmark for their own measurements can obtain  a  copy  in  machine-readable
Xform on floppy disk (MS-DOS or XENIX format) from the author.
X
X
X2.  Overall Characteristics of Version 2
X
XIn general, version 2  follows  -  in  the  parts  that  are  significant  for
Xperformance  measurement,  i.e.   within  the measurement loop - the published
X(Ada) version and the C versions previously distributed.  Where  the  versions
Xdistributed  by  Rick Richardson [2] and Reinhold Weicker have been different,
Xit  follows  the  version  distributed  by  Reinhold  Weicker.  (However,  the
Xdifferences  have  been  so  small  that their impact on execution time in all
Xlikelihood has been negligible.)  The initialization and UNIX  instrumentation
Xpart  -  which  had  been  omitted  in  [1] - follows mostly the ideas of Rick
XRichardson [2].  However, any changes in the initialization part  and  in  the
Xprinting  of  the  result have no impact on performance measurement since they
Xare outside the measaurement loop.  As a concession to older compilers,  names
Xhave been made unique within the first 8 characters for the C version.
X
XThe original publication of Dhrystone did not contain any statements for  time
Xmeasurement  since  they  are necessarily system-dependent. However, it turned
Xout that it is not enough just to inclose the main procedure of Dhrystone in a
Xloop  and  to  measure the execution time.  If the variables that are computed
Xare not used somehow, there is the danger that the compiler considers them  as
X"dead  variables" and suppresses code generation for a part of the statements.
XTherefore in version 2 all variables of "main" are printed at the end  of  the
Xprogram.  This also permits some plausibility control for correct execution of
Xthe benchmark.
X
XAt several places in the benchmark, code has been added, but only in  branches
Xthat  are  not  executed. The intention is that optimizing compilers should be
Xprevented from moving code out of the measurement loop, or from removing  code
Xaltogether.  Statements that are executed have been changed in very few places
Xonly.  In these cases, only the role of some operands has been changed, and it
Xwas   made  sure  that  the  numbers  defining  the  "Dhrystone  distribution"
X(distribution of statements, operand types and locality) still hold as much as
Xpossible.   Except for sophisticated optimizing compilers, execution times for
Xversion 2.1 should be the same as for previous versions.
X
XBecause of the self-imposed limitation that the order and distribution of  the
Xexecuted  statements  should  not  be  changed,  there  are  still cases where
Xoptimizing compilers may not generate code for some statements. To  a  certain
Xdegree,  this  is  unavoidable  for  small synthetic benchmarks.  Users of the
Xbenchmark are advised to check code listings whether code is generated for all
Xstatements of Dhrystone.
X
XContrary to the suggestion in the published paper and its realization  in  the
Xversions previously distributed, no attempt has been made to subtract the time
Xfor the measurement loop overhead. (This calculation has proven  difficult  to
Ximplement  in  a  correct  way,  and  its omission makes the program simpler.)
XHowever, since the loop check is now part of the benchmark, this does have  an
Ximpact  -  though a very minor one - on the distribution statistics which have
Xbeen updated for this version.
X
X
X3.  Discussion of Individual Changes
X
XIn this section, all changes are described that affect  the  measurement  loop
Xand  that  are  not  just  renamings  of variables. All remarks refer to the C
Xversion; the other language versions have been updated similarly.
X
XIn addition to adding  the  measurement  loop  and  the  printout  statements,
Xchanges have been made at the following places:
X
Xo In procedure "main", three statements have been added  in  the  non-executed
X  "then" part of the statement
X
X        if (Enum_Loc == Func_1 (Ch_Index, 'C'))
X
X  they are
X
X        strcpy (Str_2_Loc, "DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, 3'RD STRING");
X        Int_2_Loc = Run_Index;
X        Int_Glob = Run_Index;
X
X  The string assignment prevents  movement  of  the  preceding  assignment  to
X  Str_2_Loc  (5'th  statement  of  "main")  out  of the measurement loop (This
X  probably will not happen for the C version, but it did happen  with  another
X  language   and  compiler.)   The  assignment  to  Int_2_Loc  prevents  value
X  propagation for Int_2_Loc, and the assignment to Int_Glob makes the value of
X  Int_Glob possibly dependent from the value of Run_Index.
X
Xo In the three arithmetic computations at the end of the measurement  loop  in
X  "main  ",  the  role  of  some  variables has been exchanged, to prevent the
X  division from just cancelling out the multiplication as it was  in  [1].   A
X  very   smart  compiler  might  have  recognized  this  and  suppressed  code
X  generation for the division.
X
Xo For Proc_2, no code has been changed, but the values of the actual parameter
X  have changed due to changes in "main".
X
Xo In Proc_4, the second assignment has been changed from
X
X        Bool_Loc = Bool_Loc | Bool_Glob;
X
X  to
X
X        Bool_Glob = Bool_Loc | Bool_Glob;
X
X  It now assigns a value to a global variable  instead  of  a  local  variable
X  (Bool_Loc);   Bool_Loc  would  be  a  "dead  variable"  which  is  not  used
X  afterwards.
X
Xo In Func_1, the statement
X
X        Ch_1_Glob = Ch_1_Loc;
X
X  was added in the non-executed "else" part of the "if" statement, to  prevent
X  the suppression of code generation for the assignment to Ch_1_Loc.
X
Xo In Func_2, the second character comparison statement has been changed to
X
X        if (Ch_Loc == 'R')
X
X  ('R' instead of 'X') because  a  comparison  with  'X'  is  implied  in  the
X  preceding "if" statement.
X
X  Also in Func_2, the statement
X
X        Int_Glob = Int_Loc;
X
X  has been added in the non-executed part of the last "if" statement, in order
X  to prevent Int_Loc from becoming a dead variable.
X
Xo In Func_3, a non-executed "else" part has been added to the "if"  statement.
X  While  the  program  would  not be incorrect without this "else" part, it is
X  considered bad programming practice if a function  can  be  left  without  a
X  return value.
X
X  To compensate for this change, the (non-executed) "else" part  in  the  "if"
X  statement of Proc_3 was removed.
X
XThe distribution statistics have been changed only  by  the  addition  of  the
Xmeasurement loop iteration (1 additional statement, 4 additional local integer
Xoperands) and by the change in Proc_4  (one  operand  changed  from  local  to
Xglobal).  The distribution statistics in the comment headers have been updated
Xaccordingly.
X
X
X4.  String Operations
X
XThe string operations (string assignment and string comparison) have not  been
Xchanged, to keep the program consistent with the original version.
X
XThere has been some concern that the string operations are over-represented in
Xthe  program,  and that execution time is dominated by these operations.  This
Xwas true in particular when optimizing compilers removed too much code in  the
Xmain part of the program, this should have been mitigated in version 2.
X
XIt should be noted that this is a  language-dependent  issue:   Dhrystone  was
Xfirst  published  in  Ada, and with Ada or Pascal semantics, the time spent in
Xthe string operations is,  at  least  in  all  implementations  known  to  me,
Xconsiderably smaller.  In Ada and Pascal, assignment and comparison of strings
Xare operators defined in the language, and the upper  bounds  of  the  strings
Xoccuring  in  Dhrystone  are part of the type information known at compilation
Xtime.  The compilers can therefore generate  efficient  inline  code.   In  C,
Xstring  assignemt  and comparisons are not part of the language, so the string
Xoperations must be expressed in terms of the C library functions "strcpy"  and
X"strcmp".   (ANSI  C  allows  an  implementation  to use inline code for these
Xfunctions.)  In addition to the overhead caused by additional function  calls,
Xthese  functions  are  defined for null-terminated strings where the length of
Xthe strings is not known at compilation time; the function has to check  every
Xbyte for the termination condition (the null byte).
X
XObviously, a C library which includes efficiently coded "strcpy" and  "strcmp"
Xfunctions  helps to obtain good Dhrystone results. However, I don't think that
Xthis is unfair since string  functions  do  occur  quite  frequently  in  real
Xprograms  (editors, command interpreters, etc.).  If the strings functions are
Ximplemented efficiently,  this  helps  real  programs  as  well  as  benchmark
Xprograms.
X
XI admit that the  string  comparison  in  Dhrystone  terminates  later  (after
Xscanning  20  characters)  than most string comparisons in real programs.  For
Xconsistency with the original benchmark, I didn't change the  program  despite
Xthis weakness.
X
X
X5.  Intended Use of Dhrystone
X
XWhen Dhrystone is used, the following "ground rules" apply:
X
Xo Separate compilation (Ada and C versions)
X
X  As mentioned in [1], Dhrystone was written  to  reflect  actual  programming
X  practice  in  systems  programming.   The  division into several compilation
X  units (5 in the Ada version, 2 in the C version)  is  intended,  as  is  the
X  distribution of inter-module and intra-module subprogram calls.  Although on
X  many systems there will be no difference in execution time  to  a  Dhrystone
X  version  where  all  compilation units are merged into one file, the rule is
X  that separate compilation should  be  used.   The  intention  is  that  real
X  programming  practice,  where  programs  consist  of  several  independently
X  compiled units, should  be  reflected.   This  also  has  implies  that  the
X  compiler,  while  compiling  one  unit,  has no information about the use of
X  variables, register allocation etc.  occuring in  other  compilation  units.
X  Although  in  real  life  compilation  units  will  probably  be larger, the
X  intention is that these effects  of  separate  compilation  are  modeled  in
X  Dhrystone.
X
X  A few language systems have post-linkage optimization available (e.g., final
X  register allocation is performed after linkage).  This is a borderline case:
X  Post-linkage  optimization  involves  additional  program  preparation  time
X  (although  not  as  much  as  compilation in one unit) which may prevent its
X  general use in practical programming.  I think that  since  it  defeats  the
X  intentions given above, it should not be used for Dhrystone.
X
X  Unfortunately, ISO/ANSI  Pascal  does  not  contain  language  features  for
X  separate  compilation.   Although  most  commercial Pascal compilers provide
X  separate compilation in some way, we cannot use it for Dhrystone since  such
X  a  version  would  not  be portable.  Therefore, no attempt has been made to
X  provide a Pascal version with several compilation units.
X
Xo No procedure merging
X
X  Although Dhrystone contains some very short procedures where execution would
X  benefit  from  procedure  merging (inlining, macro expansion of procedures),
X  procedure merging is not to be used.  The reason is that the  percentage  of
X  procedure  and  function  calls  is  part of the "Dhrystone distribution" of
X  statements contained in [1].  This restriction does not hold for the  string
X  functions  of  the  C  version  since ANSI C allows an implementation to use
X  inline code for these functions.
X
Xo Other optimizations are allowed, but they should be indicated
X
X  It is often hard to draw an exact line between "normal code generation"  and
X  "optimization"  in  compilers:  Some compilers perform operations by default
X  that are invoked in other compilers only  when  optimization  is  explicitly
X  requested.  Also, we cannot avoid that in benchmarking people try to achieve
X  results that look as good as possible.  Therefore,  optimizations  performed
X  by  compilers  -  other  than  those  listed  above - are not forbidden when
X  Dhrystone execution times are measured.  Dhrystone is  not  intended  to  be
X  non-optimizable  but  is  intended  to  be  similarly  optimizable as normal
X  programs.   For  example,  there  are  several  places  in  Dhrystone  where
X  performance   benefits   from   optimizations   like   common  subexpression
X  elimination, value  propagation  etc.,  but  normal  programs  usually  also
X  benefit  from  these  optimizations.   Therefore,  no  effort  was  made  to
X  artificially  prevent  such  optimizations.   However,  measurement  reports
X  should  indicate  which  compiler  optimization  levels  have been used, and
X  reporting results with different levels of  compiler  optimization  for  the
X  same hardware is encouraged.
X
Xo Default results are those without "register" declarations (C version)
X
X  When Dhrystone results are quoted  without  additional  qualification,  they
X  should  be  understood  as  results  obtained  without use of the "register"
X  attribute. Good compilers should be able to make good use of registers  even
X  without explicit register declarations ([3], p. 193).
X
XOf course, for experimental  purposes,  post-linkage  optimization,  procedure
Xmerging and/or compilation in one unit can be done to determine their effects.
XHowever,  Dhrystone  numbers  obtained  under  these  conditions   should   be
Xexplicitly  marked as such; "normal" Dhrystone results should be understood as
Xresults obtained following the ground rules listed above.
X
XIn any case, for serious performance evaluation, users are advised to ask  for
Xcode  listings  and  to  check  them carefully.  In this way, when results for
Xdifferent systems are  compared,  the  reader  can  get  a  feeling  how  much
Xperformance  difference is due to compiler optimization and how much is due to
Xhardware speed.
X
X
X6.  Acknowledgements
X
XThe C version 2.1 of Dhrystone has been developed  in  cooperation  with  Rick
XRichardson  (Tinton  Falls,  NJ), it incorporates many ideas from the "Version
X1.1" distributed previously by him over the UNIX network Usenet.  Through  his
Xactivity with Usenet, Rick Richardson has made a very valuable contribution to
Xthe dissemination of the benchmark.  I also thank  Chaim  Benedelac  (National
XSemiconductor),  David Ditzel (SUN), Earl Killian and John Mashey (MIPS), Alan
XSmith and Rafael  Saavedra-Barrera  (UC  at  Berkeley)  for  their  help  with
Xcomments on earlier versions of the benchmark.
X
X
X7.  Bibliography
X
X[1]
X   Reinhold P. Weicker: Dhrystone: A Synthetic Systems Programming Benchmark.
X   Communications of the ACM 27, 10 (Oct. 1984), 1013-1030
X
X[2]
X   Rick Richardson: Dhrystone 1.1 Benchmark Summary (and Program Text)
X   Informal Distribution via "Usenet", Last Version Known  to  me:  Sept.  21,
X   1987
X
X[3]
X   Brian W. Kernighan and Dennis M. Ritchie:  The C Programming Language.
X   Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (NJ) 1978
X
END_OF_RATIONALE
if test 18793 -ne `wc -c <RATIONALE`; then
    echo shar: \"RATIONALE\" unpacked with wrong size!
fi
# end of overwriting check
fi
if test -f README -a "${1}" != "-c" ; then
  echo shar: Will not over-write existing file \"README\"
else
echo shar: Extracting \"README\" \(2308 characters\)
sed "s/^X//" >README <<'END_OF_README'
XThis floppy disk contains the source code of the Dhrystone benchmark
X(version 2.1) in three languages:
X
XFiles containing the Ada version (*.s: Specifications, *.b: Bodies):
X
X  d_global.s
X  d_main.b
X  d_pack_1.b
X  d_pack_1.s
X  d_pack_2.b
X  d_pack_2.s
X
X  (The file names have been abbreviated to 8 characters plus extension
X   for MS-DOS)
X
XFiles containing the C version (*.h: Header File, *.c: C Modules)
X
X  dhry.h
X  dhry_1.c
X  dhry_2.c
X
XFile containing the Pascal version:
X
X  dhry.p
X
XThe file RATIONALE contains the article
X
X  "Dhrystone Benchmark: Rationale for Version 2 and Measurement Rules"
X
Xwhich has been published, together with the C source code (Version 2.0),
Xin SIGPLAN Notices vol. 23, no. 8 (Aug. 1988), pp. 49-62.
XThis article explains all changes that have been made for Version 2,
Xcompared with the version of the original publication
Xin Communications of the ACM vol. 27, no. 10 (Oct. 1984), pp. 1013-1030.
XIt also contains "ground rules" for benchmarking with Dhrystone
Xwhich should be followed by everyone who uses the program and publishes
XDhrystone results.
X
XCompared with the Version 2.0 published in SIGPLAN Notices, Version 2.1
Xcontains a few corrections that have been made after Version 2.0 was
Xdistriobuted over the UNIX network Usenet. These small differences between
XVersion 2.0 and 2.1 should not affect execution time measurements.
XFor those who want to compare the exact contents of both versions,
Xthe file "dhry_c.dif" contains the differences between the two versions,
Xas generated by a file comparison of the corresponding files with the
XUNIX utility "diff".
X
XRecipients of this floppy disk who perform measurements are asked
Xto send measurement results to the author and/or to Rick Richardson.
XRick Richardson publishes regularly Dhrystone results on the UNIX network
XUsenet. For submissions of results to him (preferably by electronic mail,
Xsee address in the program header), he has provided a form which is contained
Xin the file "submit.frm".
X
XAugust 17, 1988
X
X                 Reinhold P. Weicker
X                 Siemens AG, E STE 35
X                 Postfach 3240
X                 D-8520 Erlangen
X                 Germany (West)
X
X                 Phone:  [xxx-49]-9131-7-20330  (8-17 Central European Time)
X                 Usenet: ..!mcvax!unido!estevax!weicker
END_OF_README
if test 2308 -ne `wc -c <README`; then
    echo shar: \"README\" unpacked with wrong size!
fi
# end of overwriting check
fi
if test -f README.RER -a "${1}" != "-c" ; then
  echo shar: Will not over-write existing file \"README.RER\"
else
echo shar: Extracting \"README.RER\" \(4419 characters\)
sed "s/^X//" >README.RER <<'END_OF_README.RER'
X12/04/88
X
XHere is Reinhold Weicker's DHRYSTONE 2.1 benchmark, slightly modified
Xby me for instrumentation purposes only.  This is an integer CPU
Xbenchmark.  The differences between 2.0 and 2.1 are minor, and
XI believe that 2.0 and 2.1 results are comparable.
X
XFor purists, I've enclosed context diffs to turn what I'm posting
Xas 2.1 back into what Reinhold sent me as 2.1.  The changes
Xare in pure2_1.dif.  As you can see, it is only the instrumentation
Xthat is slightly different.
X
XBoth the C and the Pascal versions are here.  The Ada version I
Xhave is marked preliminary (not to be posted).
X
XI've enclosed a new submission form (note new address for mailings).
XPlease deluge this mailbox (..!uunet!pcrat!dry2) with your results.
XI'll summarize and repost when the dust clears.  Please do not
Xassume that I will pull posted results off of the net (I won't, its
Xtoo much work).
X
XI've attempted to include a Makefile for UNIX and Microsoft C (with ndmake).
XPay particular attention to the HZ parameter, even though your power may
Xbe 50 or 60 hertz, your computer may not be.  You may have to ask someone,
Xread the manual, or check:
X    /usr/include/sys/param.h
X    /usr/include/limits.h        (CLK_TCK==HZ)
Xfor this information.
X
XREPEAT: HZ IS NOT NECESSARILY THE FREQUENCY OF YOUR AC POWER !!!!!!
X
XThere are two versions to run, one with register variables, and one
Xwithout.  Please let the benchmark run for 30,000 loops on sixteen
Xbit machines, and for much longer (a minute or two) on faster machines.
XPlease note that "time(2)" has a resolution of 1 second, and may give
Xvariable results.  No matter how time is measured, a sanity check with
Xa stopwatch is prudent.  We've run into systems that lie about time,
Xand there is always the configuration error problem.  When it comes
Xto time measurement on UNIX, there is no widely adhered to standard.
X
XFor segmented architectures, it is appropriate to submit results for
Xall memory models, as shown below.
X
XI dropped the CODESIZE information that I attempted to add the last
Xtime I posted this.  People couldn't follow directions, and the
Xinformation wasn't very useful anyway.
X
XHere's a sample submission of results:
X
XDHRYSTONE 2.1 BENCHMARK REPORTING FORM
XMANUF: IBM
XMODEL: PC/AT
XPROC: 80286
XCLOCK: 8
XOS: Venix
XOVERSION: SVr2.3
XCOMPILER: AT&T cc
XCVERSION: 11/8/84
XOPTIONS: -O
XNOREG: 1450
XREG: 1450
XNOTES: HZ=60; Small Model
XDATE: 03/04/88
XSUBMITTER: pcrat!rick (Rick Richardson)
XMAILTO: uunet!pcrat!dry2
X
XDHRYSTONE 2.1 BENCHMARK REPORTING FORM
XMANUF: IBM
XMODEL: PC/AT
XPROC: 80286
XCLOCK: 8
XOS: Venix
XOVERSION: SVr2.3
XCOMPILER: AT&T cc
XCVERSION: 11/8/84
XOPTIONS: -O -Ml
XNOREG: 1043
XREG: 1043
XNOTES: HZ=60; Large Model
XDATE: 03/04/88
XSUBMITTER: pcrat!rick (Rick Richardson)
XMAILTO: uunet!pcrat!dry2
X
XThe program that processes submission forms is rather dumb.  Please
Xdo not change the order, add or removes lines in the form.  If your
XNOTES are longer than the space provided, then they are too long for
Xthe summary.  Keep it terse, please.
X
XA form consists of all lines between:
X    DHRYSTONE 2.1 BENCHMARK REPORTING FORM
Xand
X    MAILTO: uunet!pcrat!dry2
Xboth lines must be present for the form to be processed.  If
Xa field does not apply or is not known, leave it blank.  The fields
Xare:
X    MANUF:    Computer manufacturer, e.g. AT&T, IBM
X    MODEL:    Model number of computer
X    PROC:    If a microprocessor CPU, the part number, e.g. 68030
X    CLOCK:    Clock in Mhz, if known.  Numeric only, e.g. 16.67
X    OS:    Operating system, e.g. UNIX
X    OVERSION: OS version, e.g. SVR3
X    COMPILER: Compiler name, e.g. cc, Microsoft, or Green Hills
X    CVERSION: Compiler version, e.g. 5.10
X    OPTIONS: Relevant compiler options, e.g. -O3
X    NOREG:    Dhrystones/second, no register attribute
X    REG:    Dhrystones/second, with register attribute
X    NOTES:    Additional, terse comments on one line
X    DATE:    Date of test, US format MM/DD/YY
X    SUBMITTER: uucp or domain address (full name)
X
X
XHZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ
X
XPlease, if you are using times(2) to measure time, indicate
Xthe HZ value you used in the NOTES field.  Something like this is OK:
X
X    NOTES: HZ=100; no inlining...
X
XHZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ HZ
X
X--
X        Rick Richardson, President, PC Research, Inc.
X
X(201) 542-3734 (voice, nights)   OR     [phone] (voice, days)
Xuunet!pcrat!rick (UUCP)            [e-mail] (INTERNET)
X        uunet!pcrat!dry2   (Dhrystone submission forms only)
END_OF_README.RER
if test 4419 -ne `wc -c <README.RER`; then
    echo shar: \"README.RER\" unpacked with wrong size!
fi
# end of overwriting check
fi
if test -f clarify.doc -a "${1}" != "-c" ; then
  echo shar: Will not over-write existing file \"clarify.doc\"
else
echo shar: Extracting \"clarify.doc\" \(3195 characters\)
sed "s/^X//" >clarify.doc <<'END_OF_clarify.doc'
XCLARIFICATION
XThere seems to have been a great deal of confusion over what this
Xbenchmark measures, and how to use these results.  Let me try to clarify
Xthis:
X
X    1) DHRYSTONE is a measure of processor+compiler efficiency in
X       executing a 'typical' program.  The 'typical' program was
X       designed by measuring statistics on a great number of
X       'real' programs.  The 'typical' program was then written
X       by Reinhold P. Weicker using these statistics.  The
X       program is balanced according to statement type, as well
X       as data type.
X
X    2) DHRYSTONE does not use floating point.  Typical programs don't.
X
X    3) DHRYSTONE does not do I/O.  Typical programs do, but then
X       we'd have a whole can of worms opened up.
X
X    4) DHRYSTONE does not contain much code that can be optimized
X       by vector processors.  That is why a CRAY doesn't look real
X       fast, they weren't built to do this sort of computing.
X
X    5) DHRYSTONE does not measure OS performance, as it avoids
X       calling the O.S.  The O.S. is indicated in the results only
X       to help in identifying the compiler technology.
X
X    6) DHRYSTONE is not perfect, but is a hell of a lot better than
X       the "sieve", or "SI".
X
X    7) DHRYSTONE gives results in dhrystones/second.  Bigger
X       numbers are better.  As a baseline, the original IBM PC
X       gives around 300-400 dhrystones/second with a good compiler.
X       The fastest machines today are approaching 100,000.
X
XIf somebody asked me to pick out the best machine for the money, I
Xwouldn't look at just the results of DHRYSTONE.  I'd probably:
X
X    1) Run DHRYSTONE to get a feel for the compiler+processor
X       speed.
X    2) Run any number of benchmarks to check disk I/O bandwidth,
X       using both sequential and random read/writes.
X    3) Run a multitasking benchmark to check multi-user response
X       time.  Typically, these benchmarks run several types of
X       programs such as editors, shell scripts, sorts, compiles,
X       and plot the results against the number of simulated users.
X    4) If appropriate for the intended use, run something like
X       WHETSTONE, to determine floating point performance.
X    5) If appropriate for intended use, run some programs which do
X       vector and matrix computations.
X    6) Figure out what the box will:
X        - cost to buy
X        - cost to operate and maintain
X        - be worth when it is sold
X        - be worth if the manufacturer goes out of business
X    7) Having done the above, I probably have a hand-full of
X       machines which meet my price/performance requirements.
X       Now, I find out if the applications programs I'd like
X       to use will run on any of these machines.  I also find
X       out how much interest people have in writing new software
X       for the machine, and look carefully at the migration path
X       I will have to take when I reach the (inevitable) limits
X       of the machine.
X
XTo summarize, DHRYSTONES by themselves are not anything more than
Xa way to win free beers when arguing 'Box-A versus Box-B' religion.
XThey do provide insight into Box-A/Compiler-A versus Box-A/Compiler-B
Xcomparisons.
X
X            Rick Richardson
X            PC Research, Inc.
X            [phone] (9-17 EST)
X            [phone] (7-9,17-24 EST)
X            ...!uunet!pcrat!rick    (normal mail)
X            ...!uunet!pcrat!dry2    (results only)
END_OF_clarify.doc
if test 3195 -ne `wc -c <clarify.doc`; then
    echo shar: \"clarify.doc\" unpacked with wrong size!
fi
# end of overwriting check
fi
if test -f pure2_1.dif -a "${1}" != "-c" ; then
  echo shar: Will not over-write existing file \"pure2_1.dif\"
else
echo shar: Extracting \"pure2_1.dif\" \(3590 characters\)
sed "s/^X//" >pure2_1.dif <<'END_OF_pure2_1.dif'
X*** rer/dhry.h    Sun Dec  4 00:08:26 1988
X--- weicker/dhry.h    Sun Dec  4 00:09:00 1988
X***************
X*** 38,45
X   *              PC Research. Inc.
X   *              94 Apple Orchard Drive
X   *              Tinton Falls, NJ 07724
X!  *                      Phone:  [phone] (9-17 EST)
X!  *                      Usenet: ...!uunet!pcrat!rick
X   *
X   *      Please send results to Rick Richardson and/or Reinhold Weicker.
X   *      Complete information should be given on hardware and software used.
X
X--- 38,45 -----
X   *              PC Research. Inc.
X   *              94 Apple Orchard Drive
X   *              Tinton Falls, NJ 07724
X!  *                      Phone:  [phone] (9-17 EST)
X!  *                      Usenet: ...!seismo!uunet!pcrat!rick
X   *
X   *      Please send results to Rick Richardson and/or Reinhold Weicker.
X   *      Complete information should be given on hardware and software used.
X***************
X*** 348,354
X  /* Compiler and system dependent definitions: */
X
X  #ifndef TIME
X- #undef TIMES
X  #define TIMES
X  #endif
X                  /* Use times(2) time function unless    */
X
X--- 348,353 -----
X  /* Compiler and system dependent definitions: */
X
X  #ifndef TIME
X  #define TIMES
X  #endif
X                  /* Use times(2) time function unless    */
X***************
X*** 353,366
X  #endif
X                  /* Use times(2) time function unless    */
X                  /* explicitly defined otherwise         */
X-
X- #ifdef MSC_CLOCK
X- #undef HZ
X- #undef TIMES
X- #include <time.h>
X- #define HZ    CLK_TCK
X- #endif
X-         /* Use Microsoft C hi-res clock */
X
X  #ifdef TIMES
X  #include <sys/types.h>
X
X--- 352,357 -----
X  #endif
X                  /* Use times(2) time function unless    */
X                  /* explicitly defined otherwise         */
X
X  #ifdef TIMES
X  #include <sys/types.h>
X*** rer/dhry_1.c    Sun Dec  4 00:08:36 1988
X--- weicker/dhry_1.c    Sun Dec  4 00:09:09 1988
X***************
X*** 47,53
X  struct tms      time_info;
X  extern  int     times ();
X                  /* see library function "times" */
X! #define Too_Small_Time (2*HZ)
X                  /* Measurements should last at least about 2 seconds */
X  #endif
X  #ifdef TIME
X
X--- 47,53 -----
X  struct tms      time_info;
X  extern  int     times ();
X                  /* see library function "times" */
X! #define Too_Small_Time 120
X                  /* Measurements should last at least about 2 seconds */
X  #endif
X  #ifdef TIME
X***************
X*** 56,65
X  #define Too_Small_Time 2
X                  /* Measurements should last at least 2 seconds */
X  #endif
X- #ifdef MSC_CLOCK
X- extern clock_t    clock();
X- #define Too_Small_Time (2*HZ)
X- #endif
X
X  long            Begin_Time,
X                  End_Time,
X
X--- 56,61 -----
X  #define Too_Small_Time 2
X                  /* Measurements should last at least 2 seconds */
X  #endif
X
X  long            Begin_Time,
X                  End_Time,
X***************
X*** 139,147
X  #ifdef TIME
X    Begin_Time = time ( (long *) 0);
X  #endif
X- #ifdef MSC_CLOCK
X-   Begin_Time = clock();
X- #endif
X
X    for (Run_Index = 1; Run_Index <= Number_Of_Runs; ++Run_Index)
X    {
X
X--- 135,140 -----
X  #ifdef TIME
X    Begin_Time = time ( (long *) 0);
X  #endif
X
X    for (Run_Index = 1; Run_Index <= Number_Of_Runs; ++Run_Index)
X    {
X***************
X*** 199,207
X  #endif
X  #ifdef TIME
X    End_Time = time ( (long *) 0);
X- #endif
X- #ifdef MSC_CLOCK
X-   End_Time = clock();
X  #endif
X
X    printf ("Execution ends\n");
X
X--- 192,197 -----
X  #endif
X  #ifdef TIME
X    End_Time = time ( (long *) 0);
X  #endif
X
X    printf ("Execution ends\n");
END_OF_pure2_1.dif
if test 3590 -ne `wc -c <pure2_1.dif`; then
    echo shar: \"pure2_1.dif\" unpacked with wrong size!
fi
# end of overwriting check
fi
if test -f submit.frm -a "${1}" != "-c" ; then
  echo shar: Will not over-write existing file \"submit.frm\"
else
echo shar: Extracting \"submit.frm\" \(170 characters\)
sed "s/^X//" >submit.frm <<'END_OF_submit.frm'
XDHRYSTONE 2.1 BENCHMARK REPORTING FORM
XMANUF:
XMODEL:
XPROC:
XCLOCK:
XOS:
XOVERSION:
XCOMPILER:
XCVERSION:
XOPTIONS:
XNOREG:
XREG:
XNOTES:
XDATE:
XSUBMITTER:
XMAILTO: uunet!pcrat!dry2
END_OF_submit.frm
if test 170 -ne `wc -c <submit.frm`; then
    echo shar: \"submit.frm\" unpacked with wrong size!
fi
# end of overwriting check
fi
echo shar: End of shell archive.
exit 0