On 18 Sep 2006 12:00:57 +0700, Egor Pasko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the 0x1E5 day of Apache Harmony Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
Thanks for explaining. This is another variant of the bytecode-based
regression tests.
This variant is also adoptable to Java-based and IR-based regression tests.
On the 0x1E5 day of Apache Harmony Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
Thanks for explaining. This is another variant of the bytecode-based
regression tests.
This variant is also adoptable to Java-based and IR-based regression tests.
On 15 Sep 2006 17:53:00 +0700, Egor Pasko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the 0x1E5 day of Apache Harmony Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
Egor,
How Nullstone tests differ from what Rana proposed and Mikhail L. prototyped
- could you please elaborate?
the idea is simple. You have two versions of a test. First --
unoptimized, second -- same algorithm, but optimized by
On 15 Sep 2006 11:26:40 +0700, Egor Pasko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the 0x1E4 day of Apache Harmony Mikhail Fursov wrote:
This would be the best solution to test if an optimization works as
expected.
We can create the following framework inside Jitrino compiler to test
individual
Hi Rana
2006/9/14, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
SNIP
One way to write the test would be to loop N times on a scenario that
kicks in the optimization say, array bounds check elimination and then loop
N times a very similar scenario but such that the bounds check does not get
eliminated.
*Re-sending to the new thread:*
Hello Rana,
When I think of an optimization which gives 1% improvement on some simple
workload or 3% improvement on EM64T platforms only I doubt this can be
easily detected with a general-purpose test suite. IMO the performance
regression testing should have a
On the 0x1E4 day of Apache Harmony Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
When I think of an optimization which gives 1% improvement on some simple
workload or 3% improvement on EM64T platforms only I doubt this can be
easily detected with a general-purpose test suite. IMO the performance
regression testing
In the example i've mentioned before the difference between optimized and
non-optimized calls was about 1000x. But the test sometimes failed anyway
Thanks,
Mikhail
14 Sep 2006 17:59:44 +0700, Egor Pasko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On the 0x1E4 day of Apache Harmony Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
When I think
This would be the best solution to test if an optimization works as
expected.
We can create the following framework inside Jitrino compiler to test
individual optimizations and optimizations inter-dependencies:
Create a special optimization (test) that that works only for special
Java method
On the 0x1E4 day of Apache Harmony Mikhail Loenko wrote:
In the example i've mentioned before the difference between optimized and
non-optimized calls was about 1000x. But the test sometimes failed anyway
Yet, I think, pure Java performance is more predictable than network
performance. I am
On the 0x1E4 day of Apache Harmony Mikhail Fursov wrote:
This would be the best solution to test if an optimization works as
expected.
We can create the following framework inside Jitrino compiler to test
individual optimizations and optimizations inter-dependencies:
Create a special
Egor,
How Nullstone tests differ from what Rana proposed and Mikhail L. prototyped
- could you please elaborate?
Thanks,
Pavel
Any other ideas or experience how to test compiler optimizations
predictably?
although having performance measurements, NULLSTONE-like tests are
quite predictable
12 matches
Mail list logo
