[Pixman] Benchmarked: [PATCH 1/4] Change conditions for setting FAST_PATH_SAMPLES_COVER_CLIP flags

[Pekka Paalanen]

On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 15:47:01 +0300
Oded Gabbay <oded.gabbay at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Oded Gabbay <oded.gabbay at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 2:25 PM, Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> The series as benchmarked is available at:
> >> https://git.collabora.com/cgit/user/pq/pixman.git/log/?h=cover-benchmark-1
> >>
> >> The benchmark points are:
> >>
> >> - baseline: "test: Add cover-test v5"
> >>
> >> - cleanup: "affine-bench: remove 8e margin from COVER area"
> >>         Includes the 8e extra safety margin removal.
> >>
> >> - tight: "pixman-fast-path: Make bilinear cover fetcher use
> >>         COVER_CLIP_TIGHT flag"
> >>         Includes all the COVER_CLIP_BILINEAR related patches from
> >>         Ben.

> > I decided to also run the cairo trimmed benchmarks on my POWER8
> > ppc64le and POWER7 ppc64.
> > To make things clearer, I used the same definitions for "baseline",
> > "cleanup" and "tight".
> >
> > I used Cairo version 1.14.3, actually from git with head set to 6f7a9b4
> > I run the benchmarks doing (it's from inside a script):
> > "cairo-perf-trace benchmark -r -i8 > ../${__output}.perf"

> Please disregard the email above - the results there are bogus because
> my server is inside a VM!!!
> 
> After I sent my email, I run the cleanup version 5 times in a row. The
> first 4 times were identical, but the 5th time showed major slowdown.
> 
> I also run the tight version 5 times in a row. The 2nd run showed
> major improvement over the 1st run, the 3rd run showed an additional
> improvement on top of that, and the 4th and 5th runs were identical to
> the 3rd run.
> 
> On the one hand, I'm not running anything else on this server. On the
> other hand, this is a VM, so maybe the host machine is
> over-subscribed.
> 
> I then went to test it on a physical server without VM (the ppc64
> version). I run cleanup and tight 5 times, and all results were
> identical. So I think the issue is definitely with the VM.
> 
> And as for the results, I'm happy to say that there is no change
> between cleanup and tight :)

Hi Oded,

heh, yeah, double-checking is worth it. :-)

Thank you for confirming my results, even though that's not exactly
good news for the patches. ;-) Not bad either.

I will be trying to record a Cairo trace that would represent the usage
patterns we saw in Raspbian which is the root of Ben's efforts.


Thanks,
pq
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/pixman/attachments/20150921/ef7558eb/attachment.sig>