Mads, is this within the noise tolerance? Otherwise we can try caching whether or not valgrind is present.
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Timur Iskhodzhanov<timur...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've run > $ cd benchmarks; ../shell run.js > with the original (r2487) and annotated version of V8. > > Before each run I did > $ rm shell; ./tools/test.py > to re-build the binaries. > > Results on Intel Core 2 Duo 6600: > Original: 3805 3864 3804 3759 3804, avg=3807 > Annotated: 3822 3883 3736 3766 3812, avg=3803 > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 1:36 PM, <de...@chromium.org> wrote: >> Timur, do you have numbers from the v8 benchmark (release build, not >> running under valgrind) for before / after? >> >> Thanks >> >> On 2009/07/20 12:28:51, Dean McNamee wrote: >>> >>> Timur reports that this patch (and not having to specify >> >> --smc-check=all) cuts >>> >>> 10-15% off some of the chrome tests running under valgrind. >> >>> I cleaned up the patch. I think the instrumentation code should be >> >> fast enough >>> >>> to keep even in release (and without any special defines), but we'll >> >> have to >>> >>> watch the numbers and decide what to do... >> >> >> >> http://codereview.chromium.org/13612 >> > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ v8-dev mailing list v8-dev@googlegroups.com http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
