On Oct 8, 2008, at 10:58 AM, Ashley Pittman wrote:
> You probably already know this but the obvious candidate here is the
> memcpy() function, icc sticks in it's own which in some cases is much
> better than the libc one. It's unusual for compilers to have *huge*
> differences from code optimisations alone.
Yep -- memcpy is one of the things that we're looking at. Haven't
heard back on the results from the next round of testing yet (one of
the initial suggestions we had was to separate openib vs. sm
performance and see if one of them yielded an obvious difference).