Re: cortex / arm-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi (was Re: armelfp: new architecture name for an armel variant)

[Konstantinos Margaritis <markos@genesi-usa.com>]

Oh, btw, I also had done some benchmarking -much more elaborate than yours, 
I'm afraid- when rewriting these functions using another algorithm (Pade 
approximants, but that's not the discussion here):

0..M_PI/4
hardfp: 3184713.38 calculations of sinf()/sec
softfp:  3039513.68 calculations of sinf()/sec
hardfp 5% faster than softfp

0..M_PI/2
hardfp: 2304147.47 calculations of sinf()/sec
softfp: 2232142.86 calculations of sinf()/sec
hardfp 3% faster than softfp

0..M_PI
hardfp: 1949317.74 calculations of sinf()/sec
softfp:  1865671.64 calculations of sinf()/sec
hardfp: 5% faster than softfp

No comment needed. Such results are consistent with all math functions that I 
have tested (cosf, tanf, expf, etc). Speed gain is accumulative, so in say a 
rotation matrix function, with (usually) 2 cosf+2 sinf calls, the speed gain 
would be ~20%. Add some more math optimizations, and we end up to the ~30-35% 
speed gain we reached. Still don't believe me?

Konstantinos