From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52882) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asmtl-00069B-33 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 03:50:09 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asmth-0003k6-2p for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 03:50:09 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-x235.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::235]:36334) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asmtg-0003ik-TD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 03:50:05 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-x235.google.com with SMTP id v188so191714131wme.1 for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 00:50:04 -0700 (PDT) References: <1459834253-8291-1-git-send-email-cota@braap.org> <1459834253-8291-10-git-send-email-cota@braap.org> <87fuuwbcq2.fsf@linaro.org> <20160419230600.GB2621@flamenco> From: Alex =?utf-8?Q?Benn=C3=A9e?= In-reply-to: <20160419230600.GB2621@flamenco> Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 08:50:01 +0100 Message-ID: <87wpnsvhw6.fsf@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 09/10] qht: add test program List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Emilio G. Cota" Cc: QEMU Developers , MTTCG Devel , Paolo Bonzini , Peter Crosthwaite , Richard Henderson , Peter Maydell , Sergey Fedorov Emilio G. Cota writes: > On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 11:45:41 +0100, Alex Bennée wrote: > (snip the entire patch) >> A couple of notes: >> >> - these should use the gtester boiler plate for reporting results > > Done in v3. > >> - AFAICT they are not exercising the multi-element hashing we actually >> use in the main code >> - it would be nice to add a check on the bucket/map distribution to >> defend against the algorithm being accidentally weakened with follow up patches > > I added tb hash chain info to 'info jit' to keep track of this. My goal > with the test program is to check that the hash table is correct; I'd > rather check performance with QEMU than with a made-up test, since > it is QEMU's performance what we care about. Fair enough. We could do with more TCG exercising test cases in the make check but that's a different (and more difficult) problem. > > Thanks, > > Emilio -- Alex Bennée