On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Kentaro Takami <kentaro.takami@aei.mpg.de> wrote:

> Do you also have performance data to support your statement that
> OpenMP is slowing things down in this case?

Please see the attached file.
Apparently the case (4) is the fastest, that is, OMP palatalization
shouldn't be used
for these small section.

If I read the numbers correctly, then the original code is the fastest in all cases, sometimes by a factor of five.

-erik

--
Erik Schnetter <schnetter@cct.lsu.edu>
http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/personal/eschnetter/