Re: [Qemu-devel] Benchmarking linux-user performance

[Emilio G. Cota]

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 12:48:31 +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 10 March 2017 at 12:45, Dr. David Alan Gilbert <address@hidden> wrote:
> > * Emilio G. Cota (address@hidden) wrote:
> >>                      x86_64 NBench Floating Point Performance
> >>                   Host: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2690 0 @ 2.90GHz
> >>
> >>   1.88 
> >> +-+-+---+--+---+---+---+--+---+---+---+---+--+---+---+---+--+---+-+-+
> >>        |   +   +  +  *A*#*A*  +  +   +   +   +   +  +   +   +   +  +   +   
> >> |
> >>   1.86 +-+           *** ***                                             
> >> +-+
> >>        |            #       #   *A*#***                                    
> >> |
> >>        |      *A*# #         # ##   *A*                                    
> >> |
> >>   1.84 +-+    #  *A*         *A*      #                                  
> >> +-+
> >>        |      #                        #                              *A*  
> >> |
> >>   1.82 +-+   #                          #                            ##  
> >> +-+
> >>        |     #                          *A*#                        #      
> >> |
> >>    1.8 +-+  #                               #  #*A*               *A*    
> >> +-+
> >>        |    #                               *A*   #                #       
> >> |
> >>   1.78 +-+*A*                                      #       *A*    #      
> >> +-+
> >>        |                                           #   ***#  #    #        
> >> |
> >>        |                                           *A*#*A*    #  #         
> >> |
> >>   1.76 +-+                                         ***         # #       
> >> +-+
> >>        |   +   +  +   +   +   +  +   +   +   +   +  +   +   +  *A* +   +   
> >> |
> >>   1.74 
> >> +-+-+---+--+---+---+---+--+---+---+---+---+--+---+---+---+--+---+-+-+
> >>          v1.v1.v1.2v1.3v1.4v1.v1.6v1.7v2.0v2.1v2.v2.3v2.4v2.5v2.v2.7v2.8.0
> >>                                    QEMU version
> >
> > I'm assuming the dips are where QEMU fixed something and cared about corner
> > cases/accuracy?
> 
> Given the scale on the LHS is from 1.74 to 1.88 my guess is that the
> variation is in large part noise and the major thing is "our fp
> performance is bounded by softfloat, which doesn't change and is
> always very slow".

It isn't "measurement noise" -- if you look at the PNGs the measurements
are very stable (all points have error bars): http://imgur.com/a/nF7Ls

It's true that performance here varies very little. This is just the
result of Amdahl's law, as you point out. (upon re-reading your message,
I see that perhaps what you meant by "noise" is exactly this.)

                E.