From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89A36C433E2 for ; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 21:18:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5734A20724 for ; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 21:18:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="dm5C9+V9" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 5734A20724 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:42512 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jq1Ag-0007cE-Gf for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 17:18:34 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52400) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jq19K-0006bf-N0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 17:17:10 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-x232.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::232]:41192) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jq19I-0003B9-N6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 17:17:10 -0400 Received: by mail-lj1-x232.google.com with SMTP id 9so19934957ljc.8 for ; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 14:17:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Cor3noOZv309F5AD2DQpc2DUTU6UE2LakDF6OM9CAcU=; b=dm5C9+V9pa3Ta0Ciy+fOmhsMu7wPsWqBWpOWOTcSkLrmc2o6S/01kIBq57P6LJ1PKN YPdRLx3HCC0ePNhAH5rnV7sUVJEUUfDMdAwL3lPSjjwwod1AkWiCW8iTYXbRe7s8uTqE nAjjrg2v54iJQf+2CohczqkS/Ixdv//HK4WCAyuWaUwbSypH0xPcSDP4rcz0D2uxhEoS v2zYE2U39OX17QZrk8Zk7ZPH7eY6UAABmBTuIhJqKXQHn3hxhBq0v/bZouRVUcGiVA9j Wl//6UgHROh/5bRoRTYjpyeP96YkQ95CEVMahrf5AvaOzIWWNjhrS5k0WN9y30dsBCKu AODA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Cor3noOZv309F5AD2DQpc2DUTU6UE2LakDF6OM9CAcU=; b=dm2T1ycoFJJS9K6R4l/baTDadvM4M5PTp2dtxx9d7326LAY1en9BQJKRG4OcnzNIiz M5vPltWLxShKId2XOUAsWRO+ZuW8T6xXSH/NQ9y+R7WFUPtu9qOJPC4VPtrKocwZXciw MQWfWrm2khCYR12MBvVmVytiBz5QIU3q3iYRvzrL7EGHcxtyScYDFaj3tbbEwCU3hHkx cv+tkRHwmpR4L60mMrw8xxDW0VU+cJqHaICdWI3jaZ6Jo6oo9uJ9rs9Lxzk7aOESz7Kj 1C2c/Nv1AhOEHFeLKpzaPHmvhqTZB+GMdT1w2+nw+QQ+0I+yeYXbchPNUGLnJ0qvbcJg uwHw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53001FO+Ku4QaPnFR/R0LzBOnEqedDIKvy/EwlwhXPVyESEPgBeV f9pi8fsGvY/iCNZib1pOMnEz2yjZzFYxQrB0rQY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxaoVN3e0FviRClfajJueiGW4gjI6fig+6GGTi4p3ezIk3iDcEh++4RTSyR9Wqbh3xhJIUupHnZGdVLrC2WISU= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9b87:: with SMTP id z7mr4741227lji.80.1593465426218; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 14:17:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <878sg5svu5.fsf@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: <878sg5svu5.fsf@linaro.org> From: Ahmed Karaman Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 23:16:27 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [REPORT] [GSoC - TCG Continuous Benchmarking] [#2] Dissecting QEMU Into Three Main Parts To: =?UTF-8?B?QWxleCBCZW5uw6ll?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::232; envelope-from=ahmedkhaledkaraman@gmail.com; helo=mail-lj1-x232.google.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: No matching host in p0f cache. That's all we know. X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: =?UTF-8?B?THVrw6HFoSBEb2t0b3I=?= , Aleksandar Markovic , QEMU Developers , Richard Henderson Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 6:03 PM Alex Benn=C3=A9e w= rote: > > > Ahmed Karaman writes: > > > Hi, > > > > The second report of the TCG Continuous Benchmarking series builds > > upon the QEMU performance metrics calculated in the previous report. > > This report presents a method to dissect the number of instructions > > executed by a QEMU invocation into three main phases: > > - Code Generation > > - JIT Execution > > - Helpers Execution > > It devises a Python script that automates this process. > > > > After that, the report presents an experiment for comparing the > > output of running the script on 17 different targets. Many conclusions > > can be drawn from the results and two of them are discussed in the > > analysis section. > > A couple of comments. One think I think is missing from your analysis is > the total number of guest instructions being emulated. As you point out > each guest will have different code efficiency in terms of it's > generated code. > > Assuming your test case is constant execution (i.e. runs the same each > time) Yes indeed, the report utilizes Callgrind in the measurements so the results are very stable. >you could run in through a plugins build to extract the number of > guest instructions, e.g.: > > ./aarch64-linux-user/qemu-aarch64 -plugin tests/plugin/libinsn.so -d pl= ugin ./tests/tcg/aarch64-linux-user/sha1 > SHA1=3D15dd99a1991e0b3826fede3deffc1feba42278e6 > insns: 158603512 > That's a very nice suggestion. Maybe this will be the idea of a whole new report. I'll try to execute the provided command and will let you know if I have any questions. > I should have also pointed out in your last report that running FP heavy > code will always be biased towards helper/softfloat code to the > detriment of everything else. I think you need more of a mix of > benchmarks to get a better view. > > When Emilio did the last set of analysis he used a suite he built out of > nbench and a perl benchmark: > > https://github.com/cota/dbt-bench > > As he quoted in his README: > > NBench programs are small, with execution time dominated by small code > loops. Thus, when run under a DBT engine, the resulting performance > depends almost entirely on the quality of the output code. > > The Perl benchmarks compile Perl code. As is common for compilation > workloads, they execute large amounts of code and show no particular > code execution hotspots. Thus, the resulting DBT performance depends > largely on code translation speed. > > by only having one benchmark you are going to miss out on the envelope > of use cases. > Future reports will introduce a variety of benchmarks. This report - and the previous one - are introductory reports. The benchmark used was to only demonstrate the report ideas. It was not used as a strict benchmarking program. > > > > Report link: > >https://ahmedkrmn.github.io/TCG-Continuous-Benchmarking/Dissecting-QEMU-= Into-Three-Main-Parts/ > > > > Previous reports: > > Report 1 - Measuring Basic Performance Metrics of QEMU: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2020-06/msg06692.html > > > > Best regards, > > Ahmed Karaman > > > -- > Alex Benn=C3=A9e