Displaying 20 results from an estimated 7000 matches similar to: "[LNT] new server instance http://lnt.llvm.org seems unstable"
2017 Jul 31
1
[LNT] new server instance http://lnt.llvm.org seems unstable
The run page problem were triggered by one of my commits (sorry) and should be mitigated now, see the thread at http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-July/115971.html <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-July/115971.html>
I don't know about the submission problems, could they just an occasional network problem or are they a common phenomenon? Chris did some
2017 Aug 03
2
[LNT] new server instance http://lnt.llvm.org seems unstable
On Wed, Aug 2, 2017, at 21:55, Tobias Grosser via llvm-dev wrote:
> This started since about 1-2 weeks, I guess. I am not sure about it
> either, but seems unfortunate. Maybe we run into some kind of timeout?
And another one :(
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/perf-x86_64-penryn-O3-polly/builds/1986/steps/lnt.nightly-test/logs/stdio
2017-08-03 00:24:44 CRITICAL: Results were not
2017 Aug 02
2
[LNT] new server instance http://lnt.llvm.org seems unstable
Actually I just remember LNT has a page for viewing the log:
http://lnt.llvm.org/log
...
OperationalError: (OperationalError) (2006, 'MySQL server has gone away') 'SELECT `NT_Run`.`ID` AS `NT_Run_ID`, `NT_Run`.`MachineID` AS `NT_Run_MachineID`, `NT_Run`.`OrderID` AS `NT_Run_OrderID`, `NT_Run`.`ImportedFrom` AS `NT_Run_ImportedFrom`, `NT_Run`.`StartTime` AS `NT_Run_StartTime`,
2017 Jul 31
2
Internal server error when submitting LNT to lnt.llvm.org
Dear all,
I recently started to see internal server errors when submitting perf
results to lnt.llvm.org
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/perf-x86_64-penryn-O3-polly-before-vectorizer/builds/1154/steps/lnt.nightly-test/logs/stdio
nt
/home/grosser/buildslave/perf-x86_64-penryn-O3-polly-before-vectorizer/tests/nt/build/sample-0/report.simple.csv
2019 Nov 20
4
LNT debuginfo-statistics not running?
The debug info statistics bot is triggered by this job: http://green.lab.llvm.org/green/job/clang-stage2-Rthinlto/ which unfortunately hasn't been green in a very long time (>1mo).
Alex/Azhar, do you know what's blocking that job?
-- adrian
> On Nov 20, 2019, at 9:46 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +usual debug info folks (but I think in this case
2019 Nov 20
3
LNT debuginfo-statistics not running?
Hi llvm-dev@
LNT produces statistics and graphs (such as [0]) of debuginfo metrics,
such as number of source variables with locations. It looks like these
haven't run [1] since the move from svn to git -- are there any plans
to get these running again? I find it highly useful to identify what
commits have affected variable locations and how significant an
affect.
[0]
2010 Dec 06
2
[LLVMdev] LNT somewhere hosted and used?
Hi,
I have been following the development of the /zorg/trunk/lnt project for
a while and am wondering if there is some regular LLVM performance
testing using LNT that can be accessed online? Are there any plans to
create an officially used web service for this like e.g the llvm buildbots?
Thanks a lot
Tobi
2014 Jan 17
2
[LLVMdev] Why is the default LNT aggregation function min instead of mean
Hi,
I am currently investigating how to ensure that LNT only shows relevant
performance regressions for the -O3 performance tests I am running.
One question that came up here is why the default aggregate function for
LNT is 'min' instead of 'mean'. This looks a little surprising from the
statistical point, but also from looking at my test results picking
'min' seems
2013 Jan 28
2
[LLVMdev] adding perf machines
Is O3-vectorize redundant now that the loop vectorizer is enabled by default?
On 2013-01-28, at 12:25 PM, David Blaikie wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Redmond, Paul <paul.redmond at intel.com> wrote:
>> Is there a reason why existing buildbots are not generating LNT results?
>
> Those running LNT should be/are:
>
>
2014 Jan 17
2
[LLVMdev] Why is the default LNT aggregation function min instead of mean
Right - you usually won't see a normal distribution in the noise of test
results. You'll see results clustered around the lower bound with a long
tail of slower and slower results. Depending on how many samples you do it
might be appropriate to take the mean of the best 3, for example - but the
general approach of taking the fastest N does have some basis in any case.
Not necessarily the
2013 Jan 28
3
[LLVMdev] adding perf machines
Is there a reason why existing buildbots are not generating LNT results?
On 2013-01-28, at 11:37 AM, David Blaikie wrote:
They're just build bots running LNT - check the build bot configuration code in the zorg llvm project repository. You'll probably need to do some work to get a machine quiet enough to have reliable/useful performance results, though
On Jan 28, 2013 8:33 AM,
2017 Jan 24
2
[InstCombine] rL292492 affected LoopVectorizer and caused 17.30%/11.37% perf regressions on Cortex-A53/Cortex-A15 LNT machines
> On Jan 23, 2017, at 3:48 PM, Sanjay Patel via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> All targets are likely affected in some way by the icmp+shl fold introduced with r292492. It's a basic pattern that occurs in lots of code. Did you see any perf wins on your targets with this commit?
>
> Sadly, it is also likely that many (all?) targets are negatively
2013 Apr 19
2
[LLVMdev] LNT ClamAV - Sorting output
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>wrote:
> On 19 April 2013 17:48, Török Edwin <edwin at etorok.net> wrote:
>
>> Otherwise what might seem like a 20% improvement
>> could very well be just a 0.2% improvement in practice.
>>
>
> This is (maybe to a lesser extent) what happens with most of our
> benchmarks, and
2017 Jan 24
3
[InstCombine] rL292492 affected LoopVectorizer and caused 17.30%/11.37% perf regressions on Cortex-A53/Cortex-A15 LNT machines
> On Jan 24, 2017, at 7:18 AM, Sanjay Patel <spatel at rotateright.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 10:53 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com <mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote:
>
>> On Jan 23, 2017, at 3:48 PM, Sanjay Patel via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>>
2013 Feb 19
3
[LLVMdev] ARM LNT test-suite Buildbot
On 19 February 2013 15:16, Arnold Schwaighofer <aschwaighofer at apple.com>wrote:
> Do you have a base run with vectorization turned off? So we could see
> where we are degrading things?
>
I wanted to, but after a few failed attempts, I couldn't pass the option to
clang to disable vectorization. I don't want to make Galina reconfig the
master every time, so I set up a
2010 Dec 06
0
[LLVMdev] LNT somewhere hosted and used?
On Dec 6, 2010, at 10:40 AM, Tobias Grosser wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been following the development of the /zorg/trunk/lnt project for
> a while and am wondering if there is some regular LLVM performance
> testing using LNT that can be accessed online? Are there any plans to
> create an officially used web service for this like e.g the llvm buildbots?
I have a nightly tester
2010 Dec 07
1
[LLVMdev] LNT somewhere hosted and used?
On 12/06/2010 03:33 PM, Bob Wilson wrote:
>
> On Dec 6, 2010, at 10:40 AM, Tobias Grosser wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have been following the development of the /zorg/trunk/lnt project for
>> a while and am wondering if there is some regular LLVM performance
>> testing using LNT that can be accessed online? Are there any plans to
>> create an officially
2016 Sep 01
3
Benchmarks for LLVM-generated Binaries
Hi,
I've lately been wondering where benchmarks for LLVM-generated binaries are hosted, and whether they're tracked over time. I'm asking because I'm thinking of where to put some benchmarks I've written using the open source Google benchmarking library [0] to test certain costs of XRay-instrumented binaries, the XRay runtime, and other related measurements (effect of
2016 Apr 22
2
RFC: LNT/Test-suite support for custom metrics and test parameterization
On 21 Apr 2016, at 17:44, Sergey Yakoushkin <sergey.yakoushkin at gmail.com<mailto:sergey.yakoushkin at gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Kristof,
The way we use LNT, we would run different configuration (e.g. -O3 vs -Os) as different "machines" in LNT's model.
O2/O3 is indeed bad example. We're also using different machines for Os/O3 - such parameters apply to all
2016 Sep 06
2
Benchmarks for LLVM-generated Binaries
> On Sep 1, 2016, at 8:14 AM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> On 1 September 2016 at 07:45, Dean Michael Berris via llvm-dev
> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> I've lately been wondering where benchmarks for LLVM-generated binaries are hosted, and whether they're tracked over time.
>
> Hi Dean,
>
> Do you