I'm not necessarily opposed, it just seems somewhat arbitrary to single out
gzip when the same logic could probably be applied to other tests.  I don't
run the long tests directly very much anyway, so the runtime doesn't bother
me.

Eventually we should have a more flexible regression system anyway... we
have a prototype internally at AMD but need to get some more experience
with it ourselves before releasing it.

Steve


On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Andreas Hansson <[email protected]>wrote:

> It's one of the slower ones (1 - 1.5 CPU hours for each ISA, so x4). I
> have nothing against gzip in particular, I just do not see what it adds
> compared to e.g. bzip2. Do we believe that this test actually adds any
> value?
>
> The broader question would be: which of the tests actually add coverage
> and not just CPU hours?
>
> Another reason for pruning the regressions is the size of the stats
> updates. For some of the bus/memory related patches, each bump is 10MB+
> (only stats.txt).
>
> Andreas
>
>
>
> On 27/05/2013 15:27, "Steve Reinhardt" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Is there something that bothers you particularly about 00.gzip?  It's
> >already in the 'long' set, correct?  Aren't there some other equally
> >long-running tests?
> >
> >I don't have any particular attachment to gzip, but I don't want to see it
> >unfairly singled out... it seems no less valuable than many of our other
> >tests.
> >
> >Steve
> >
> >
> >On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 1:19 AM, Andreas Hansson
> ><[email protected]>wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> Let me ask the same question in a different way:
> >>
> >> Could those that want to keep 00.gzip voice their opinion :-)
> >>
> >> I will create a patch to prune it in the meanwhile.
> >>
> >> Andreas
> >>
> >>
> >> On 22/05/2013 17:03, "Andreas Hansson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Hi everyone,
> >> >
> >> >How do people feel about pruning 00.gzip from the regressions? It takes
> >> >quite some time to run (1+ hour for each arch), and I struggle to
> >>justify
> >> >the time/energy spent. Does anyone think it adds value?
> >> >
> >> >Thanks,
> >> >
> >> >Andreas
> >> >
> >> >-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> >> >confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> >> >recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
> >> >contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy
> >> >the information in any medium. Thank you.
> >> >_______________________________________________
> >> >gem5-dev mailing list
> >> >[email protected]
> >> >http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> >> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> >> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
> >> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy
> >>the
> >> information in any medium.  Thank you.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> gem5-dev mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
> >>
> >_______________________________________________
> >gem5-dev mailing list
> >[email protected]
> >http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
> >
>
>
> -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the
> information in any medium.  Thank you.
>
> _______________________________________________
> gem5-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
>
_______________________________________________
gem5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

Reply via email to