search for: ignore_small

...l >>>in very shortly executing kernels, so they may very well be measuring >>>noice. Is this really the case? >> >> Yes, it seems that shortly executing benchmarks always show huge unexpected noise even we run 10 samples for a test. >> >> I have changed the ignore_small abs value to 0.05 from the original 0.01, which means benchmarks with the performance delta less then 0.05s would be skipped. In that case,the results seem to be much more stable. >> However, I have noticed that there are many other Polly patches between the two version r185399 and r187116. T...

...regressions. They are all >>in very shortly executing kernels, so they may very well be measuring >>noice. Is this really the case? > > Yes, it seems that shortly executing benchmarks always show huge unexpected noise even we run 10 samples for a test. > > I have changed the ignore_small abs value to 0.05 from the original 0.01, which means benchmarks with the performance delta less then 0.05s would be skipped. In that case,the results seem to be much more stable. > However, I have noticed that there are many other Polly patches between the two version r185399 and r187116. They...

...to also see performance regressions. They are all >in very shortly executing kernels, so they may very well be measuring >noice. Is this really the case? Yes, it seems that shortly executing benchmarks always show huge unexpected noise even we run 10 samples for a test. I have changed the ignore_small abs value to 0.05 from the original 0.01, which means benchmarks with the performance delta less then 0.05s would be skipped. In that case, the results seem to be much more stable. However, I have noticed that there are many other Polly patches between the two version r185399 and r187116. They may...

On 07/30/2013 10:03 AM, Star Tan wrote: > Hi Tobias and all Polly developers, > > I have re-evaluated the Polly compile-time performance using newest > LLVM/Polly source code. You can view the results on > http://188.40.87.11:8000 > <http://188.40.87.11:8000/db_default/v4/nts/16?compare_to=9&baseline=9&aggregation_fn=median>. > > Especially, I also evaluated

Hi Tobias and all Polly developers, I have re-evaluated the Polly compile-time performance using newest LLVM/Polly source code. You can view the results on http://188.40.87.11:8000. Especially, I also evaluated our r187102 patch file that avoids expensive failure string operations in normal execution. Specifically, I evaluated two cases for it: Polly-NoCodeGen: clang -O3 -load