similar to: New LLD performance builder

Hello George, Sorry, somehow hit a send button too soon. Please ignore the previous e-mail. The bot does 10 runs for each of the benchmarks (those dots in the logs are meaningful). We can increase the number of runs if proven that this would significantly increase the accuracy. I didn't see the increase in accuracy when have been staging the bot, which would justify the extra time and larger

Thanks a lot for setting this up! By using the "mean as aggregation" option one can see the noise in the results better: http://lnt.llvm.org/db_default/v4/link/graph?switch_min_mean=yes&moving_window_size=10&plot.9=1.9.7&submit=Update There are a few benchmarknig tips in https://www.llvm.org/docs/Benchmarking.html. For example, from looking at

Hello Rafael, > It seems the produced lld binary is not being statically linked. Hm. It should. But it seems couple config params are missing. Fixed. Thanks for catching this! > Is lld-speed-test in a tmpfs? Correct. All the benchmarking tips from https://www.llvm.org/docs/Benchmarking.html have been applied to that bot. > Is lld-benchmark.py a copy of lld/utils/benchmark.py?

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: > >

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,

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: http://llvm.org/perf/db_default/v4/nts/recent_activity Shows all 3 of the lab.llvm.org machines that run LNT ( http://lab.llvm.org:8011/buildslaves - you can see these 3 macminis run "-nt"

The -vectorize build bots test the BB-vectorizer. Thanks, Nadav On Jan 28, 2013, at 9:39 AM, "Redmond, Paul" <paul.redmond at intel.com> wrote: > 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

>> (3) About detecting scop regions in bottom-up order. >> Detecting scop regions in bottom-up order can significantly speed up the scop detection pass. However, as I have discussed with Sebastian, detecting scops in bottom-up order and up-bottom order will lead to different results. As a result, we should not change the detection order. > >Sebastian had a patch for this. Does

Disabling swap and having a single CPU in the shield group didn't change much, besides cpu-migrations and context-switches, which now are 0 obviously. That clustering remains the same. It is also stable to the number of runs (I have changed the test to run 20 times in the middle of that range on the right). http://lnt.llvm.org/db_default/v4/link/graph?highlight_run=426&plot.9=1.9.6

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

Hi Rafael, Thanks for mentioning this. It should be running as root, but I'll double check anyway. Thanks Galina On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 10:47 AM, Rafael Avila de Espindola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com> writes: > > > Disabling swap and having a single CPU in the shield group didn't change > > much,

Hi, So, I owe you all an apology. I was totally unaware that the llvm.org server, running at UIUC, was still in operation and hosting an active LNT instance. I was under the assumption the LNT server ran elsewhere. As a result, the ability for the LNT bots to submit run information to the "old" LNT server is now gone. I am very sorry for this oversight. In speaking with Chris

Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com> writes: > Disabling swap and having a single CPU in the shield group didn't change > much, besides cpu-migrations and context-switches, which now are 0 > obviously. > That clustering remains the same. It is also stable to the number of runs > (I have changed the test to run 20 times in the middle of that range on the > right).

Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com> writes: > Hello Rafael, > >> It seems the produced lld binary is not being statically linked. > > Hm. It should. But it seems couple config params are missing. Fixed. Thanks > for catching this! > >> Is lld-speed-test in a tmpfs? > > Correct. > All the benchmarking tips from

Hello everyone, I have added a new public LLD performance builder at http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/lld-perf-testsuite. It builds LLVM and LLD by the latest releaed Clang and runs a set of perfromance tests. The builder is reliable. Please pay attention on the failures. The performance statistics are here: http://lnt.llvm.org/db_default/v4/link/recent_activity Thanks Galina --------------

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:36 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>wrote: > 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

> The HT siblings are disabled, right? Correct. > It is probably a good idea to experiment with disabling swap and having > a single cpu in the shield group. Yep. This is what I'm in the middle of. So far I see that it seems the scheduler is keep running on shielded cores no matter what. Even if there is only 1 core in the shield. Thanks Galina On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 11:36

Hi Renato, I noticed the bot yesterday. Thanks for working on this! On Feb 19, 2013, at 7:45 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > Looks like our LNT ARM buildbot with the vectorizer is running and producing good results. Do you have a base run with vectorization turned off? So we could see where we are degrading things? When you say good

Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com> writes: > Yep. They are still clustered. > >> Is there anything else running on the machine while the tests are run? > > Not much. The usual buildslave stuff - buildbot, ssh server, some light > network services, snmp client, but that's pretty much it. 20 hardware > threads are designated for this. > > The test

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