[llvm-testresults] Grawp nightly tester results

[Daniel Dunbar]

On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Evan Cheng<evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote:
> On Sep 5, 2009, at 4:50 PM, Evan Cheng wrote:
>> On Sep 5, 2009, at 4:45 PM, Daniel Dunbar wrote:
>>> On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Evan Cheng<evan.cheng at apple.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 5, 2009, at 2:58 PM, Daniel Dunbar wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Evan Cheng<evan.cheng at apple.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What JIT regressions? All of the following failures are crashing
>>>>>> in the
>>>>>> loop
>>>>>> unswitching pass. Devang is looking into it.
>>>>>
>>>>> The performance regressions, a large number of JIT tests seem to
>>>>> have
>>>>> dropped by maybe an average of 5-10%.
>>>>
>>>> You're right. It looks real too. But none of the patches look
>>>> suspicious.
>>>
>>> That's why I asked if you can remember if the JIT callback patch was
>>> in this round or the previous one. Not sure if just changing the
>>> compilation callback could account for these swings, but I don't
>>> remember any other obvious JIT changes.
>>
>> No. It's not due to that change. I just tried r80904 on 253.perlbmk.
>> It took 11.271s vs. TOT 18.325s.
>
> Ok, this doesn't really make sense to me, but numbers don't lie:
>
> 80923: 12.982s
> 80926: 19.403s
>
> Dan, please take a look.

Thanks for tracking it down. Just based on the commit comment it
sounds like perhaps we were previously optimizing based on invalid
loop information? I can see how that could make things go faster. :)

 - Daniel