RE: [commit: ghc] master: Testsuite: recenter haddock.base allocation numbers (1b76997)

Could it be creeping up because Haddock is doing more than before? Ie not just because GHC is being bad?
S
| -----Original Message-----
| From: ghc-commits [mailto:ghc-commits-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf
| Of git@git.haskell.org
| Sent: 22 July 2015 17:33
| To: ghc-commits@haskell.org
| Subject: [commit: ghc] master: Testsuite: recenter haddock.base
| allocation numbers (1b76997)
|
| Repository : ssh://git@git.haskell.org/ghc
|
| On branch : master
| Link :
| http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/changeset/1b76997dba5c35ee956960e1948e
| e247dc57c500/ghc
|
| >---------------------------------------------------------------
|
| commit 1b76997dba5c35ee956960e1948ee247dc57c500
| Author: Thomas Miedema

On 07/22/2015 05:35 PM, Simon Peyton Jones wrote:
Could it be creeping up because Haddock is doing more than before? Ie not just because GHC is being bad?
S
Yes, it very much could be. Haddock is a moving target so it's not too weird that the numbers change. I want to say that the perf test should just be removed but it's still useful: if you're GHC hacking and not changing Haddock and numbers go awry then it serves its purpose. Ideally GHC would have more perf tests so the Haddock perf test is just not necessary but it's not easy to tell when that would be.
| -----Original Message----- | From: ghc-commits [mailto:ghc-commits-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf | Of git@git.haskell.org | Sent: 22 July 2015 17:33 | To: ghc-commits@haskell.org | Subject: [commit: ghc] master: Testsuite: recenter haddock.base | allocation numbers (1b76997) | | Repository : ssh://git@git.haskell.org/ghc | | On branch : master | Link : | http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/changeset/1b76997dba5c35ee956960e1948e | e247dc57c500/ghc | | >--------------------------------------------------------------- | | commit 1b76997dba5c35ee956960e1948ee247dc57c500 | Author: Thomas Miedema
| Date: Wed Jul 22 18:21:44 2015 +0200 | | Testsuite: recenter haddock.base allocation numbers | | | >--------------------------------------------------------------- | | 1b76997dba5c35ee956960e1948ee247dc57c500 | testsuite/tests/perf/haddock/all.T | 3 ++- | 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) | | diff --git a/testsuite/tests/perf/haddock/all.T | b/testsuite/tests/perf/haddock/all.T | index 94f7cbd..1e5a16c 100644 | --- a/testsuite/tests/perf/haddock/all.T | +++ b/testsuite/tests/perf/haddock/all.T | @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ | test('haddock.base', | [unless(in_tree_compiler(), skip), req_haddock | ,stats_num_field('bytes allocated', | - [(wordsize(64), 9014511528, 5) | + [(wordsize(64), 9418857192, 5) | # 2012-08-14: 5920822352 (amd64/Linux) | # 2012-09-20: 5829972376 (amd64/Linux) | # 2012-10-08: 5902601224 (amd64/Linux) @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ | test('haddock.base', | # 2014-10-07: 8322584616 (x86_64/Linux) | # 2014-12-14: 9502647104 (x86_64/Linux) - Update to | Haddock 2.16 | # 2014-01-08: 9014511528 (x86_64/Linux) - Eliminate so- | called "silent superclass parameters" (and others) | + # 2015-07-22: 9418857192 (x86_64/Linux) - Just slowly | creeping up. | | ,(platform('i386-unknown-mingw32'), 4434804940, 5) | # 2013-02-10: 3358693084 | (x86/Windows) | | _______________________________________________ | ghc-commits mailing list | ghc-commits@haskell.org | http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-commits _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
-- Mateusz K.

OK, so I won't lose sleep over it!
| -----Original Message-----
| From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of
| Mateusz Kowalczyk
| Sent: 23 July 2015 09:07
| To: ghc-devs@haskell.org
| Subject: Re: [commit: ghc] master: Testsuite: recenter haddock.base
| allocation numbers (1b76997)
|
| On 07/22/2015 05:35 PM, Simon Peyton Jones wrote:
| > Could it be creeping up because Haddock is doing more than before?
| Ie not just because GHC is being bad?
| >
| > S
|
| Yes, it very much could be. Haddock is a moving target so it's not too
| weird that the numbers change. I want to say that the perf test should
| just be removed but it's still useful: if you're GHC hacking and not
| changing Haddock and numbers go awry then it serves its purpose.
|
| Ideally GHC would have more perf tests so the Haddock perf test is
| just not necessary but it's not easy to tell when that would be.
|
|
| > | -----Original Message-----
| > | From: ghc-commits [mailto:ghc-commits-bounces@haskell.org] On
| > | Behalf Of git@git.haskell.org
| > | Sent: 22 July 2015 17:33
| > | To: ghc-commits@haskell.org
| > | Subject: [commit: ghc] master: Testsuite: recenter haddock.base
| > | allocation numbers (1b76997)
| > |
| > | Repository : ssh://git@git.haskell.org/ghc
| > |
| > | On branch : master
| > | Link :
| > |
| > |
| http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/changeset/1b76997dba5c35ee956960e194
| > | 8e
| > | e247dc57c500/ghc
| > |
| > | >---------------------------------------------------------------
| > |
| > | commit 1b76997dba5c35ee956960e1948ee247dc57c500
| > | Author: Thomas Miedema
participants (2)
-
Mateusz Kowalczyk
-
Simon Peyton Jones