From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
Cc: Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr>,
Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@imag.fr>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Coccinelle <cocci@systeme.lip6.fr>
Subject: Re: [Cocci] Coccinelle: null: Optimise disjunctions in SmPL script “eno.cocci”
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 21:27:27 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2010252122320.2714@hadrien> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bee0c5df-8f28-ee9d-99e2-abbf84df76e6@web.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3566 bytes --]
On Sun, 25 Oct 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> Would you become interested to configure a representative test environment
> >> for safe comparisons of corresponding run time characteristics
> >> of the affected software?
> >
> > In what sense could the comparison possibly be unsafe?
>
> * Our test systems are obviously different.
> Thus concerns can be considered for reproducibility of test results
> on other possible configurations.
>
> * We share only a tiny fraction of technical information which would probably
> be needed for “benchmarks”.
>
>
> > Just use time and run spatch on whatever machine you want.
>
> fring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Linux/next-patched>
> elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Linux/next-patched> git checkout next-20201023 && XX=$(date) && time spatch -D patch --timeout 9 --jobs 4 --chunksize 1 --include-headers --no-includes --dir . scripts/coccinelle/null/eno.cocci > ~/Projekte/Bau/Linux/scripts/Coccinelle/call_checks/20201023/eno1.diff 2> ~/Projekte/Bau/Linux/scripts/Coccinelle/call_checks/20201023/eno1-errors.txt; YY=$(date) && echo "$XX | $YY"
> …
> real 2m54,266s
> user 10m15,553s
> sys 0m4,004s
> So 25. Okt 20:53:56 CET 2020 | So 25. Okt 20:56:51 CET 2020
> elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Linux/next-patched> git checkout next-20201023 && XX=$(date) && time spatch -D context --timeout 9 --jobs 4 --chunksize 1 --include-headers --no-includes --dir . scripts/coccinelle/null/eno.cocci > ~/Projekte/Bau/Linux/scripts/Coccinelle/call_checks/20201023/eno2.txt 2> ~/Projekte/Bau/Linux/scripts/Coccinelle/call_checks/20201023/eno2-errors.txt; YY=$(date) && echo "$XX | $YY"
> …
> real 2m38,494s
> user 9m39,364s
> sys 0m4,094s
> So 25. Okt 20:58:05 CET 2020 | So 25. Okt 21:00:44 CET 2020
> elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Linux/next-patched> git checkout optimise_disjunction_in_eno.cocci-1 && XX=$(date) && time spatch -D patch --timeout 9 --jobs 4 --chunksize 1 --include-headers --no-includes --dir . scripts/coccinelle/null/eno.cocci > ~/Projekte/Bau/Linux/scripts/Coccinelle/call_checks/20201023/eno3.diff 2> ~/Projekte/Bau/Linux/scripts/Coccinelle/call_checks/20201023/eno3-errors.txt; YY=$(date) && echo "$XX | $YY"
> …
> real 2m46,097s
> user 10m15,467s
> sys 0m3,984s
> So 25. Okt 21:00:56 CET 2020 | So 25. Okt 21:03:42 CET 2020
> elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Linux/next-patched> git checkout optimise_disjunction_in_eno.cocci-1 && XX=$(date) && time spatch -D context --timeout 9 --jobs 4 --chunksize 1 --include-headers --no-includes --dir . scripts/coccinelle/null/eno.cocci > ~/Projekte/Bau/Linux/scripts/Coccinelle/call_checks/20201023/eno4.txt 2> ~/Projekte/Bau/Linux/scripts/Coccinelle/call_checks/20201023/eno4-errors.txt; YY=$(date) && echo "$XX | $YY"
> …
> real 2m41,472s
> user 9m37,492s
> sys 0m3,834s
In the patch case, the user and system time are essentially identical. In
the context case, the difference in user time is 2 seconds out of 9.5
minutes, 0.3%.
In the patch case, the real time is a bit slower. But I believe that this
is due to the time to read in the data from the file system. I also had a
number like that, but the difference disappeared when I reran it
afterwards, which meant running that case in the same conditions as the
others.
In the context case, the real time is slightly slower with your patch.
So I see no compelling evidence for making the change.
julia
> So 25. Okt 21:03:56 CET 2020 | So 25. Okt 21:06:37 CET 2020
>
>
> > Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-6200U CPU @ 2.30GHz
>
> AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 850 Processor
>
> Will any other aspects become relevant?
>
> Regards,
> Markus
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 136 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-25 20:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-25 18:01 [Cocci] [PATCH] Coccinelle: null: Optimise disjunctions in SmPL script “eno.cocci” Markus Elfring
2020-10-25 18:28 ` Julia Lawall
2020-10-25 18:45 ` [Cocci] " Markus Elfring
2020-10-25 18:56 ` Julia Lawall
2020-10-25 20:10 ` Markus Elfring
2020-10-25 20:27 ` Julia Lawall [this message]
2020-10-25 20:45 ` Markus Elfring
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2010252122320.2714@hadrien \
--to=julia.lawall@inria.fr \
--cc=Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr \
--cc=Markus.Elfring@web.de \
--cc=cocci@systeme.lip6.fr \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michal.lkml@markovi.net \
--cc=nicolas.palix@imag.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).