Re: -warmup
>> I still think that for such cases the number of iterations of the >> affected tests should be increased to get more precise values. > > the times are for single iteration. (chunk median/chunk size) Yes, but the number of iterations is the same regardless whether a test takes 10µs or 1000µs – I suspect that it is necessary to either increase the number of iterations for the former case or to do bulk tests. With 'bulk test' I mean that you don't time single iterations but do timings for 10 iterations in a group, say, thus avoiding issues with the granularity of the OS timing functions. I refuse to believe that we have to live with timing differences of more than 50%. BTW, have you checked whether replacing `CLOCK_REALTIME` with `CLOCK_MONOTONIC` gives better results? What platform do you actually develop on? What #if clause in function `get_time` of `ftbench.c` is run on your computer? Werner
Re: -warmup
> I still think that for such cases the number of iterations of the affected > tests should be increased to get more precise values. the times are for single iteration. (chunk median/chunk size) > Please separate this line slightly from the rest of the table > and print the *cumulated timing* (in 's', not 'µs') of all tests, > something like i will asap! Best, Goksu goksu.in On 29 Aug 2023 22:09 +0300, Werner LEMBERG , wrote: > > > here is the results with chris’ suggestion. (thanks chris) > > Much better, thanks! > > > still a bit noise on only load and load_advances. are results > > acceptable? > > As far as I can see, the biggest differences occur if the 'Baseline' > and 'Benchmark' columns contain very small values. I still think that > for such cases the number of iterations of the affected tests should > be increased to get more precise values. Please try that. > > Something else: I think that the 'TOTAL' line doesn't make sense right > now. Please separate this line slightly from the rest of the table > and print the *cumulated timing* (in 's', not 'µs') of all tests, > something like > > Total duration for all tests: 25.3s > > and > > Total duration of tests for 'Roboto_subset.ttf: 3.4s > > > Werner
Re: Progress update on adjustment database
> As I was testing my attempt at supporting GSUB lookups, I found that > hb_ot_layout_lookup_collect_glyphs, is actually not what I need, > because I assumed that each lookup contains exactly one > substitution, when it actually may contain multiple. What I really > need is a way to get each individual substitution. How do I do > this? It's not completely clear to me what you exactly need, please give an example. Behdad, any idea whether HarfBuzz can help here? Otherwise it is probably necessary to parse the GSUB table by ourselves, which is something I would like to avoid... Werner
Re: -warmup
> here is the results with chris’ suggestion. (thanks chris) Much better, thanks! > still a bit noise on only load and load_advances. are results > acceptable? As far as I can see, the biggest differences occur if the 'Baseline' and 'Benchmark' columns contain very small values. I still think that for such cases the number of iterations of the affected tests should be increased to get more precise values. Please try that. Something else: I think that the 'TOTAL' line doesn't make sense right now. Please separate this line slightly from the rest of the table and print the *cumulated timing* (in 's', not 'µs') of all tests, something like Total duration for all tests: 25.3s and Total duration of tests for 'Roboto_subset.ttf: 3.4s Werner
Re: -warmup
hi, here is the results with chris’ suggestion. (thanks chris) i will check hyperfine. still a bit noise on only load and load_advances. are results acceptable? Best, Goksu goksu.in On 28 Aug 2023 21:19 +0300, Werner LEMBERG , wrote: > > code Freetype Benchmark Results Warning: Baseline and Benchmark have the same commit ID! Info InfoBaselineBenchmark Parameters-c 750 -w 50-c 750 -w 50 Commit IDf3dfede6f3dfede6 Commit Date2023-08-18 17:42:53 +03002023-08-18 17:42:53 +0300 BranchGSoC-2023-AhmetGSoC-2023-Ahmet * Average time for single iteration. Smaller values are better.** N count in (x | y) format is for showing baseline and benchmark N counts seperately when they differs.Total Results TestNBaseline (µs)Benchmark (µs)Difference (%) Load3750003535.93622.3-2.4 Load_Advances (Normal)3750003057.83133.8-2.5 Load_Advances (Fast)37500010.912.5-14.7 Load_Advances (Unscaled)37500010.010.6-6.0 Render3750004772.24796.7-0.5 Get_Glyph3750003418.73415.20.1 Get_Char_Index3525009.19.10.0 Iterate CMap37506.56.50.0 New_Face3750241.5239.90.7 Embolden3750003798.93780.30.5 Stroke292750 | 28800018049.318067.9-0.1 Get_BBox3750002826.32764.22.2 Get_CBox3750003473.43421.91.5 New_Face & load glyph(s)375000555.6585.6-5.4 TOTAL4402750 | 439800043766.143866.5-0.2 Results for Roboto_subset.ttf TestN* Baseline (µs)* Benchmark (µs)Difference (%) Load9583.3575.11.4 Load_Advances (Normal)9487.7503.3-3.2 Load_Advances (Fast)92.64.1-57.7 Load_Advances (Unscaled)92.42.40.0 Render9934.1941.8-0.8 Get_Glyph9582.7597.7-2.6 Get_Char_Index705001.81.80.0 Iterate CMap7501.31.30.0 New_Face75042.541.42.6 Embolden9642.9655.9-2.0 Stroke64008.74043.7-0.9 Get_BBox9167.6139.316.9 Get_CBox9592.1602.3-1.7 New_Face & load glyph(s)9105.0105.00.0 TOTAL20640008154.78215.10.7 Results for Arial_subset.ttf TestN* Baseline (µs)* Benchmark (µs)Difference (%) Load71250812.8934.1-14.9 Load_Advances (Normal)71250733.1793.3-8.2 Load_Advances (Fast)712502.02.1-5.0 Load_Advances (Unscaled)712501.91.90.0 Render712501083.01067.41.4 Get_Glyph71250791.0789.80.2 Get_Char_Index705001.81.80.0 Iterate CMap7501.31.30.0 New_Face75051.850.03.5 Embolden71250874.9855.02.3 Stroke570003480.93439.51.2 Get_BBox71250761.9725.24.8 Get_CBox71250815.3787.53.4 New_Face & load glyph(s)71250110.7109.31.3 TOTAL16830009522.49558.20.4 Results for TimesNewRoman_subset.ttf TestN* Baseline (µs)* Benchmark (µs)Difference (%) Load71250973.9944.33.0 Load_Advances (Normal)71250876.2859.02.0 Load_Advances (Fast)712502.12.10.0 Load_Advances (Unscaled)712501.91.90.0 Render712501202.71191.11.0 Get_Glyph71250945.6922.52.4 Get_Char_Index705001.81.80.0 Iterate CMap7501.31.30.0 New_Face75053.654.1-0.9 Embolden712501059.51037.22.1 Stroke427504599.44579.50.4 Get_BBox71250895.5887.50.9 Get_CBox71250966.3917.15.1 New_Face & load glyph(s)71250135.2168.5-24.6 TOTAL165450011715.011567.9-1.3 Results for Tahoma_subset.ttf TestN* Baseline (µs)* Benchmark (µs)Difference (%) Load71250572.0570.30.3 Load_Advances (Normal)71250469.6525.8-12.0 Load_Advances (Fast)712502.12.10.0 Load_Advances (Unscaled)712501.92.5-31.6 Render71250785.6801.5-2.0 Get_Glyph71250560.0564.4-0.8 Get_Char_Index705001.81.80.0 Iterate CMap7501.31.30.0 New_Face75047.147.10.0
