Dear all ;

I've written a code in fortran90. Since my sample is large, my code
runs slowly.
I need some flags in order to enter them to Makefile which can be able
to run the code with higher speed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
this is my Makefile:
----------------------------------
FC=ifort
NROBJS=nr.o nrtype.o parametros.o
MYOBJS= wfinside.o gauntutils.o leedutils.o
MYSUBFUN=DoubleFactorialDP.o FactorialDP.o Gaunt.o Legendre.o
SphericalHarmonicYZ.o SqrtFactorialDP.o ThreeJSymbol.o factorial.f90
bessel.o writefile.o intgral.o ComlexUnit.o
.SUFFIXES:
.SUFFIXES: .f90 .o

all: $(NROBJS) $(MYOBJS) $(MYSUBFUN) main-goodformat2.o
$(FC) $(NROBJS) $(MYOBJS) $(MYSUBFUN) main-goodformat2.o -o
wannier.exe

On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 00:29:40 -0700 (PDT), Fatemeh gmail.com>
wrote in <23de88ca-360d-44d2-b1f2-da24b92166bf@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>:

On Sep 8, 12:02 pm, "Dr Ivan D. Reid" brunel.ac.uk> wrote:

On Sep 8, 12:33 pm, Fatemeh gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 00:29:40 -0700 (PDT), Fatemeh gmail.com>
wrote:

Since you are using Intel Fortran (for Linux, I assume), please feel free to
ask your questions in our user forum at:

http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/isn/Community/en-US/forums/1011/ShowForum.asp...

-O3 has been suggested. You should also use an instruction set optimization
option appropriate for the processor you're using (which you did not specify.)
http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/isn/Community/en-US/forums/1011/ShowForum.asp...
describes these options and lists the processors to which they apply. You
should also read
http://www.intel.com/support/performancetools/sb/CS-028403.htm For example,
if you were using an Intel Core 2 processor, use -xT .

Another option you can experiment with is -ipo. This needs to be specified
both for compile and for the ifort command that creates the executable. This
has the same effect as combining all the sources as mentioned by Ivan.

Fatemeh gmail.com> wrote:

Others have mentioned the most straightforward answer to this - namely
to turn on the compiler's optimizer, making the code run faster being
exactly what the optimizer is for.

But I'm afraid that a much more basic answer is that there probably is
no magic switch that will solve your problem. Making programs run faster
is a subject of far more depth than just finding a magic switch. At
times there can be trivial solutions, but at other times it can take a
lot of work. You gave pretty much no specific useful data in your
posting, so I can't offer much in the way of specific useful replies.

Some very general answers, unfortunately to general to be of much use,
I'm afraid.

1. Well, there are always the compiler optimization options, as you
asked for. Sometimes one can get lucky. Other times, they do no good at
all. I'd say that most often, they offer some speedup, but probably less
than what I'm guessing you are looking for. Would you be happy with 30%%
speedup? That would be pretty good (though exact numbers do vary a lot).

Fatemeh wrote:

In general, you should study the compiler documentation. After a
certain level, optimizations become so aggressive that they are not
guaranteed to speed up your program and may even slow it down. Also,
some optimizations sacrifice accuracy for additional speed. You will
need to test them, to determine what works best and to determine what
you can use without getting wrong (or insufficiently accurate) results.

On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 01:33:10 -0700 (PDT), Fatemeh gmail.com>
wrote in <25135587-cf11-414f-80d1-a17640c15999@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>:

but Richard Maine's solution is more general. I think you need to read up
the documentation on makefiles as well as ifort flags.

On Sep 8, 11:15 am, Fatemeh gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 23:08:21 -0700 (PDT), michaelmetcalf@compuserve.com wrote:

The only situation where array bounds checking is on by default is in the
Debug configuration of a Visual Studio project. In a Release configuration,
or if building from the command line, all the run-time checks are off by
default.

--
Steve Lionel
Developer Products Division
Intel Corporation
Nashua, NH

For email address, replace "invalid" with "com"