Removal of ICC (intel compiler) bits from mk

[Alexander Leidinger]

Quoting "V. T. Mueller, Continum" <v.t.mueller at continum.net> (from  
Thu, 19 Aug 2010 11:15:19 +0200):

> Alexander Leidinger wrote:
>>> Alexander Leidinger wrote:
>>>> If someone would get icc 11.x up and runnig as a port (similar to  
>>>> what we have for outdated icc version in the ports collection), I  
>>>> would have a look if my contact at Intel is still working there  
>>>> in a position which allows him to get a commercial license for us.
>>>
>>> A while ago it was stated by MySQL AB, that their dbms performs  
>>> about 20% better when compiled with icc instead of gcc. Is this  
>>> (still) true?
>>
>> This looks overly simplified. "It runs better on CPU X with  
>> benchmark Y on Mainboard Z when you use gcc A.B.C with options D  
>> and compare it to icc E.F.G with options H." is something you can  
>> use in such cases, but it doesn't tell you if it will be the case  
>> on your machines with your workload.
>>
>> If you want to know if it is faster on your machines with your  
>> workload, then there is only one way to find it out: try it (be  
>> warned, due to the amount of optimization options available in  
>> gcc/icc, something like this will take a lot of time, as there are  
>> a lot of combinations to try).
>
> Sounds reasonable. But doesn't that mean, that there is no need to  
> (take the hassle to) support icc in the future? Especially while  
> folks are being keen on abandon gcc for clang?

It may matter in the HPC community where optimization to a specific  
CPU matters (it doesn't matter that much for MySQL). There it does not  
matter much to have the kernel compiled with icc, but a icc port would  
be handy for them.

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing...
		-- Thomas Jefferson

http://www.Leidinger.net    Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org       netchild @ FreeBSD.org  : PGP ID = 72077137