[llvm-dev] RFC: LNT/Test-suite support for custom metrics and test parameterization

Matthias Braun via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Wed May 25 11:23:17 PDT 2016

> On May 25, 2016, at 1:54 AM, Elena Lepilkina via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
> Thank you for your answer.
> But can you answer for some more questions?
> First of all, now LNT uses make-style of running tests and parse results from result csv file. Are there any plans to go to cmake?
As James already said "lnt runtest test-suite".

> As I understood lit will run and collect all metrics, but there is no opportunity to make any settings for choosing what metrics I would like to collect. Test reports files allow to choose what report I would like. One time I can use one, second time I can use another. I can do this with cmake only by changing test_modules in file.
> So I can’t group some metrics and give them some name.
The test_modules flag does indeed allow some customisation in what metrics are collected, my main usage for this has been do setup things to just collect codesize but not run the benchmark, a setup in which benchmarks are cross compiled and then run on a remote device through ssh and the "default" mode which just runs all benchmarks and collects as much metrics as possible.
However lit is a tool to run the benchmarks, you still need other tools to filter analyze and present the data afterwards: The typical process we have today is to run the tests with lnt, store the results in lnt and filter/analyze with the lnt webpage. If you need custom reports then you can either add new views to lnt or write some scripts that parse the json output produced by lit. I have some personal scripts I use to compare the results of two test-suite runs because I find that easier to do ad-hoc from the commandline rather than getting lnt running just to compare two runs, I can send you those scripts as an example, however if you want something better looking than commandline output or need to process data from a lot of runs then I recommend extending lnt for your reporting needs.

- Matthias

> Am I right?
> Thanks,
> Elena.
> From: Matthias Braun [mailto:matze at braunis.de] 
> Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 8:03 PM
> To: Elena Lepilkina <Elena.Lepilkina at synopsys.com>
> Cc: Daniel Dunbar <daniel at zuster.org>; llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>; nd <nd at arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: LNT/Test-suite support for custom metrics and test parameterization
> On May 12, 2016, at 11:21 PM, Elena Lepilkina via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> Hi all,
> As we understood great changes will be done in LNT, so we are waiting to new LNT version and stopped our work in LNT.
> One more question about using test-suite separately with cmake. Cmake can only build all tests and generate lit tests. After that we can run LIT and get report which is not equal with report (simple) got with make. Cmake test-suite version has no features to run custom metrics and generate other report type, right?
> Are these features of make-version of test-suite planned to be added?
> The lit test-suite runner supports arbitrary metrics, it already features codesizes for different segments, compiletime, linktime, executable hash, execution time. I designed it be easily extensible with further metrics. Not all of these metrics are understood by LNT yet so they may get lost after submission to an LNT database.
> We do not use GenerateReport.pl and friends in the cmake/lit version anymore, as the main data collection and reporting mechanism in llvm has mostly shifted to LNT these days. In any case it should be easy to use “lit -o result.json” and process the resulting json file in your favorite scripting language to generate arbitrary reports.
> As far as the TEST.*.Makefile things go: Many of those variants have no equivalent in cmake/lit. But I have the strong feeling that the majority of those is not really used or even broken so there are no plans to adding them to. On the other hand I would love to hear from people that actually use any of those besides TEST.simple.Makefile, it should be possible to transition most of them but I’d first like to  hear what they are used for.
> - Matthias
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160525/82ecb437/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list