On 4/16/08, Alexey Varlamov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/4/16, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On 4/16/08, Alexey Varlamov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > 2008/4/16, Tony Wu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Is it possible to integrate into BTI? if not we can consider the > > > > enhanced/tools/ > > > > > > There is one already in drlvm trunk, see > > > working_vm/src/test/microbenchmark. > > > There is no infrastructure around, it is mere store holder for now. > > > Feel free to add benches there, they are not intended to be > > > VM-specific. > > > > > > > I would say opposite if they are DRLVM specific then it is OK to put > > them to the folder. Otherwise (i.e. they are not VM-specific) we > > should integrate them to BTI. > > > > Th point is that DRLVM workspace should contain only DRLVM specific > > tests. For example, IMO DRLVM workspace is not the right place for > > EHWA-API scenario. > > This is too radical position IMO. Absolute majority of tests in DRLVM > are functional and not impl-specific, should we move them all to BTI? >
Yes, IMHO we should move them to BTI. The point is that any workspace (classlib/drlvm/jdktools) is not a repository for a set of different suites. > Sometimes convenience of using and extending is more important for > success. If we had appropriate infra for benchmarks I wouldn't argue, > but now I'm afraid most contributors would rather leave a bench-case > hanging in JIRA than dare to hack BTI. I'm happy to be proven wrong, > though. > "convenience of using and extending" is questionable for me in this case. Well, yes I agree that from position of a DRLVM developer it is more convenient when EHWA-API scenario is located in DRLVM workspace - no additional efforts are required to run it. But what about classlib developer who wants to run EHWA-API on J9 - she/he needs to checkout DRLVM workspace. Is this convenient and extensible? (Hmm, may be I was wrong when I insisted on integration of LDAP scenario into BTI then into classlibrary ;-)) Seriously, if we think that using BTI is complicated for a developer then we should do our best and make it simpler and more convenient. Otherwise we finish with zoo of different suites/scenarios in several places. Thanks, Stepan. > Regards, > Alexey > > > > Thanks, > > Stepan. > > > > > Re integration to BTI, this would require fair amount of efforts and > > > usage model is not clear to me. > > > > > > > > > > > On 4/15/08, Aleksey Shipilev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Hi Tony, all! > > > > > > > > > > Does it make sense to create special place in our repository for > > > > > storing the benchmarks like this one I've used in my performance > > > > > researches on Harmony? It would be great to have them synchronized in > > > > > repos rather than store in JIRA. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Aleksey. > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Tony Wu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Aleksey, > > > > > > I think keep the benchmark somewhere such as JIRA is also ok. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Tony Wu > > > > China Software Development Lab, IBM > > > > > > > > > >
