| Message ID | 1505756414-12857-2-git-send-email-siddhesh@sourceware.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/2] benchtests: Memory walking benchmark for memcpy | expand |
On 09/18/2017 11:40 AM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > String benchmarks that store results as throughput rather than > latencies will show positive improvements as negative. Add a flag to > fix the output of compare_strings.py in such cases. > > * benchtests/scripts/compare_strings.py: New option -t. ... and you wouldn't need this patch if you'd not changed to throughput. Can't you just post-process the data to get throughput for your fancy graphs... or better yet add fancy graph support directly to benchtests ;-)
On Friday 22 September 2017 12:01 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > On 09/18/2017 11:40 AM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: >> String benchmarks that store results as throughput rather than >> latencies will show positive improvements as negative. Add a flag to >> fix the output of compare_strings.py in such cases. >> >> * benchtests/scripts/compare_strings.py: New option -t. > ... and you wouldn't need this patch if you'd not changed to throughput. > > Can't you just post-process the data to get throughput for your fancy > graphs... or better yet add fancy graph support directly to benchtests ;-) I suppose I could add a property to the benchmark output itself like: "result-type": "rate" | "time" which should be a hint to any post-processing scripts like compare_strings.py. BTW, there's a -g switch that generates graphs for the string benchmarks in compare_strings.py. One needs to exclude the simple_* string functions to get more meaningful results since these tend to be significantly slower, thus unnecessarily increasing the range of the Y-axis. Siddhesh
diff --git a/benchtests/scripts/compare_strings.py b/benchtests/scripts/compare_strings.py index 65119ed..acb64b9 100755 --- a/benchtests/scripts/compare_strings.py +++ b/benchtests/scripts/compare_strings.py @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ def draw_graph(f, v, ifuncs, results): pylab.savefig('%s-%s.png' % (f, v), bbox_inches='tight') -def process_results(results, attrs, base_func, graph): +def process_results(results, attrs, base_func, graph, throughput): """ Process results and print them Args: @@ -110,6 +110,8 @@ def process_results(results, attrs, base_func, graph): if i != base_index: base = res['timings'][base_index] diff = (base - t) * 100 / base + if throughput: + diff = -diff sys.stdout.write (' (%6.2f%%)' % diff) sys.stdout.write('\t') i = i + 1 @@ -132,7 +134,7 @@ def main(args): attrs = args.attributes.split(',') results = parse_file(args.input, args.schema) - process_results(results, attrs, base_func, args.graph) + process_results(results, attrs, base_func, args.graph, args.throughput) if __name__ == '__main__': @@ -152,6 +154,8 @@ if __name__ == '__main__': help='IFUNC variant to set as baseline.') parser.add_argument('-g', '--graph', action='store_true', help='Generate a graph from results.') + parser.add_argument('-t', '--throughput', action='store_true', + help='Treat results as throughput and not time.') args = parser.parse_args() main(args)