[llvm-dev] Who owns the as-worker-5:2 machine? (Was: Some questions re tracking LLD for Mach-O's performance using LNT)

[Galina Kistanova via llvm-dev]

Hello everyone,

Sorry for the late response.

In general, I don't mind altering the schema. My only concern is I do not
want to lose the history of already collected data.
Could somebody confirm that this schema change is safe in this regard,
please?

+ We would need to coordinate well with the change, and I'll have to change
that builder right after the new schema is deployed.

Thanks

Galina


On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 10:58 AM Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> Yes, as-worker-5 is mine.
> That's listed in http://lab.llvm.org:8011/#/workers/23.
>
> Let me read through this email thread to understand what this is about,
> and I'll get back to you.
>
> Thanks
>
> Galina
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 10:10 AM Chris Matthews <chris.matthews at apple.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Maybe Galina knows about as-worker-5:2?
>>
>> > On Jan 21, 2021, at 9:14 AM, Jez via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Thanks Chris! I belatedly found that file under lld/utils/. A bit
>> > surprising that it isn't in the LNT repo itself but I guess it was
>> > copied over into the deployed server by hand...
>> >
>> > I would like to re-surface question #3 in my original message: who
>> > owns as-worker-5:2? I've created a handful of diffs modifying
>> > benchmark.py (D95082, D95084), which I believe is being run on that
>> > machine. I don't think my changes will break anything, but it would be
>> > nice to get a stamp from whomever still depends on it. (The original
>> > author was Rafael Espindola.)
>> >
>> > Jez
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 4:55 PM Chris Matthews <
>> chris.matthews at apple.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I forget when that was setup, but here is a copy of the schema from
>> the lnt.llvm.org server:
>> >>
>> >> ```
>> >> format_version: '2'
>> >> name: link
>> >> run_fields:
>> >>  - name: llvm_project_revision
>> >>    order: true
>> >> machine_fields:
>> >>  - name: hardware
>> >>  - name: os
>> >> metrics:
>> >> - name: branch-misses
>> >>   bigger_is_better: false
>> >>   type: Real
>> >> - name: stalled-cycles-frontend
>> >>   bigger_is_better: false
>> >>   type: Real
>> >> - name: branches
>> >>   bigger_is_better: false
>> >>   type: Real
>> >> - name: context-switches
>> >>   bigger_is_better: false
>> >>   type: Real
>> >> - name: cpu-migrations
>> >>   bigger_is_better: false
>> >>   type: Real
>> >> - name: cycles
>> >>   bigger_is_better: false
>> >>   type: Real
>> >> - name: instructions
>> >>   bigger_is_better: false
>> >>   type: Real
>> >> - name: seconds-elapsed
>> >>   bigger_is_better: false
>> >>   type: Real
>> >> - name: page-faults
>> >>   bigger_is_better: false
>> >>   type: Real
>> >> - name: task-clock
>> >>   bigger_is_better: false
>> >>   type: Real
>> >> ```
>> >>
>> >> On Jan 19, 2021, at 1:49 PM, Jez via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I understand that the `link` test suite schema at
>> https://lnt.llvm.org/ is being used to record profiling results for LLD
>> for ELF. I would like to do the same with LLD's Mach-O implementation by
>> running the profiling jobs on an internal server & submitting the results
>> to the public LNT instance. A few questions:
>> >>
>> >> 1. I don't see the `link` schema under `schemas/` in the `lnt` repo.
>> Where can I find it?
>> >>
>> >> 2. Should I reuse the schema or create a new one? I expect that we can
>> stick to the same set of perf data fields, so reusing should be fine as
>> long as we create one more column to indicate whether we're running the ELF
>> or Mach-O suite.
>> >>
>> >> 3. I would also like to reuse the lld/utils/benchmark.py script.
>> Currently, it invokes the LLD for ELF process via a hard-coded name, so I
>> would like to make that configurable via a CLI flag. But that would involve
>> updating the current job on the `as-worker` machines to specify the ELF
>> back-end. Who owns those machines and would be able to do this update?
>> (That said, it's hardly a blocker, since I can still have the script
>> default the ELF backend for now.)
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Jez
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>> >>
>> >>
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > LLVM Developers mailing list
>> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> > https://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/20210205/d7fa4364/attachment.html>