llvm dev - May 2014 - [LLVMdev] Use perf tool for more accurate time measuring on Linux

On 20 May 2014 17:55, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es>
wrote:
> I set it to 2667.000 Mhz on parkas16. You can try if this improves
> something.
I don't see any sign of improvement.

Since we can't get raw data any better, I think we should get this
merged and tested on build bots for a while and see how it goes.

Cheers,
Yi Kong

On 21/05/2014 22:13, Yi Kong wrote:
> On 20 May 2014 17:55, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote:
>> I set it to 2667.000 Mhz on parkas16. You can try if this improves
>> something.
>
> I don't see any sign of improvement.
>
> Since we can't get raw data any better, I think we should get this
> merged and tested on build bots for a while and see how it goes.
My builders are prepared for this (and I can fix upcoming issues in case 
I forgot something). Chris, Hal, Renato? What do you think?

Tobias

On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 12:09 AM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es>
wrote:
> On 21/05/2014 22:13, Yi Kong wrote:
>
>> On 20 May 2014 17:55, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es>
wrote:
>>
>>> I set it to 2667.000 Mhz on parkas16. You can try if this improves
>>> something.
>>>
>>
>> I don't see any sign of improvement.
>>
>> Since we can't get raw data any better, I think we should get this
>> merged and tested on build bots for a while and see how it goes.
>>
>
> My builders are prepared for this (and I can fix upcoming issues in case I
> forgot something). Chris, Hal, Renato? What do you think?

I should have mentioned this idea previously, but what about making the
script gracefully degrade in the absence of these tools? That way builders
won't regress but ones with the tools will just get better timing.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140522/3af0c4ab/attachment.html>