Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "904b76b9".
2013 Jun 27
0
[LLVMdev] [LNT] Question about results reliability in LNT infrustructure
...ctical number can vary depending on the arch).
It's better to re-run some benchmarks 10 times, but use 8 CPUs than use
only one...
cheers,
--renato
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130627/904b76b9/attachment.html>
2013 Jun 27
0
[LLVMdev] [LNT] Question about results reliability in LNT infrustructure
On Jun 27, 2013, at 9:27 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote:
> On 27 June 2013 17:05, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote:
> We are looking for a good way/value to show the reliability of individual results in the UI. Do you have some experience, what a good measure of the reliability of test results is?
>
> Hi Tobi,
>
> I had a look at
2013 Jun 27
7
[LLVMdev] [LNT] Question about results reliability in LNT infrustructure
There are a few things we have looked at with LNT runs, so I will share the insights we have had so far. A lot of the problems we have are artificially created by our test protocols instead of the compiler changes themselves. I have been doing a lot of large sample runs of single benchmarks to characterize them better. Some key points:
1) Some benchmarks are bi-modal or multi-modal, single