Re: Considering dropping Talos support for Linux32

[Mike Hommey]

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 07:33:47AM -0400, joel maher wrote:
> we have 32 bit windows builds, are there specific concerns you have about
> the perf impact of SSE2 and linux32 builds?

GCC is not MSVC. They don't do the same kinds of optimizations (in fact,
MSVC happily uses both x87 and SSE when enabling SSE, GCC is supposed to
not use x87). One would expect improvements, but it could as well be 0.1%
or 10%, we wouldn't know unless we measure it...

Mike
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Considering dropping Talos support for Linux32

[joel maher]

we have 32 bit windows builds, are there specific concerns you have about
the perf impact of SSE2 and linux32 builds?

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 7:14 AM, Mike Hommey  wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 06:40:08PM -0700, jma...@mozilla.com wrote:
> > Our infrastructure at Mozilla does a great job of supporting all the
> > jobs we need to run jobs for the thousands of pushes we do each month.
> > Currently Talos runs on real hardware (and we have no plans to change
> > that), but it does mean that we have a limited pool of available
> > machines.  Right now this isn't a problem for Linux 32 or 64 since we
> > don't run any other jobs on those platforms.
> >
> > The problem we do have is on OSX and Windows, and in the last 2 weeks
> > we have had a big problem with backlog on Windows.  The main reason we
> > have a problem on OSX and Windows is because we run all the unit tests
> > on there as well.  Granted we have a larger pool of machines, but we
> > run a considerably larger volume of tests on there.
> >
> > Trying to be smart about what we are doing, bug 1204920 [1] was filed
> > to look into what would happen if we stopped running Talos on Linux32.
> > We would still have OSX, Windows, and Linux64 support and from looking
> > at all the data for the last 90 days, there are very few minor
> > differences between 32 and 64 when it comes to catching regressions.
> >
> > After looking into this, we realized that we could reimage the linux32
> > machines as windows machines- this would then solve our backlog and
> > give us some breathing room on capacity until we find other ways to
> > reduce the load or make a more formal decision to increase the machine
> > pool.
> >
> > Sadly there are really no plans to formally add back Linux32 support.
> > What does Linux32 give us that Linux64 doesn't when it comes to Talos
> > results?  I am looking at this from a narrow lens, quite possibly
> > someone else has ideas of what might be more useful.  Overall we are
> > serious about doing this, but want to do it knowing more so at what
> > cost.
> >
> > Thanks for reading and fixing Performance regressions when they show
> > up in your patches!
>
> And here we are, 8 months later, deciding to compile linux32 builds with
> SSE2, and no way to know what impact that has on performance...
>
> Mike
>
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Considering dropping Talos support for Linux32

[Mike Hommey]

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 06:40:08PM -0700, jma...@mozilla.com wrote:
> Our infrastructure at Mozilla does a great job of supporting all the
> jobs we need to run jobs for the thousands of pushes we do each month.
> Currently Talos runs on real hardware (and we have no plans to change
> that), but it does mean that we have a limited pool of available
> machines.  Right now this isn't a problem for Linux 32 or 64 since we
> don't run any other jobs on those platforms.
> 
> The problem we do have is on OSX and Windows, and in the last 2 weeks
> we have had a big problem with backlog on Windows.  The main reason we
> have a problem on OSX and Windows is because we run all the unit tests
> on there as well.  Granted we have a larger pool of machines, but we
> run a considerably larger volume of tests on there.
> 
> Trying to be smart about what we are doing, bug 1204920 [1] was filed
> to look into what would happen if we stopped running Talos on Linux32.
> We would still have OSX, Windows, and Linux64 support and from looking
> at all the data for the last 90 days, there are very few minor
> differences between 32 and 64 when it comes to catching regressions.
> 
> After looking into this, we realized that we could reimage the linux32
> machines as windows machines- this would then solve our backlog and
> give us some breathing room on capacity until we find other ways to
> reduce the load or make a more formal decision to increase the machine
> pool.
> 
> Sadly there are really no plans to formally add back Linux32 support.
> What does Linux32 give us that Linux64 doesn't when it comes to Talos
> results?  I am looking at this from a narrow lens, quite possibly
> someone else has ideas of what might be more useful.  Overall we are
> serious about doing this, but want to do it knowing more so at what
> cost.
> 
> Thanks for reading and fixing Performance regressions when they show
> up in your patches!

And here we are, 8 months later, deciding to compile linux32 builds with
SSE2, and no way to know what impact that has on performance...

Mike
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Considering dropping Talos support for Linux32

[Ehsan Akhgari]

On 2015-09-24 10:55 PM, Justin Dolske wrote:

On 9/24/15 6:55 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:


FWIW I agree that Talos results for Linux32 are unimportant. Even if
there
was a Linux-32-only regression, I don't think it'd be worth our
developers
spending time on it.


I agree. Kill them.


+1.

___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Considering dropping Talos support for Linux32

[jmaher]

Our infrastructure at Mozilla does a great job of supporting all the jobs we 
need to run jobs for the thousands of pushes we do each month.  Currently Talos 
runs on real hardware (and we have no plans to change that), but it does mean 
that we have a limited pool of available machines.  Right now this isn't a 
problem for Linux 32 or 64 since we don't run any other jobs on those platforms.

The problem we do have is on OSX and Windows, and in the last 2 weeks we have 
had a big problem with backlog on Windows.  The main reason we have a problem 
on OSX and Windows is because we run all the unit tests on there as well.  
Granted we have a larger pool of machines, but we run a considerably larger 
volume of tests on there.

Trying to be smart about what we are doing, bug 1204920 [1] was filed to look 
into what would happen if we stopped running Talos on Linux32.  We would still 
have OSX, Windows, and Linux64 support and from looking at all the data for the 
last 90 days, there are very few minor differences between 32 and 64 when it 
comes to catching regressions.

After looking into this, we realized that we could reimage the linux32 machines 
as windows machines- this would then solve our backlog and give us some 
breathing room on capacity until we find other ways to reduce the load or make 
a more formal decision to increase the machine pool.

Sadly there are really no plans to formally add back Linux32 support.  What 
does Linux32 give us that Linux64 doesn't when it comes to Talos results?  I am 
looking at this from a narrow lens, quite possibly someone else has ideas of 
what might be more useful.  Overall we are serious about doing this, but want 
to do it knowing more so at what cost.

Thanks for reading and fixing Performance regressions when they show up in your 
patches!


[1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1204920
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Considering dropping Talos support for Linux32

[Robert O'Callahan]

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 1:40 PM,  wrote:

> Thanks for reading and fixing Performance regressions when they show up in
> your patches!
>

FWIW I agree that Talos results for Linux32 are unimportant. Even if there
was a Linux-32-only regression, I don't think it'd be worth our developers
spending time on it.

Rob
-- 
lbir ye,ea yer.tnietoehr  rdn rdsme,anea lurpr  edna e hnysnenh hhe uresyf
toD
selthor  stor  edna  siewaoeodm  or v sstvr  esBa  kbvted,t
rdsme,aoreseoouoto
o l euetiuruewFa  kbn e hnystoivateweh uresyf tulsa rehr  rdm  or rnea
lurpr
.a war hsrer holsa rodvted,t  nenh hneireseoouot.tniesiewaoeivatewt sstvr
esn
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Considering dropping Talos support for Linux32

[Justin Dolske]

On 9/24/15 6:55 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:


FWIW I agree that Talos results for Linux32 are unimportant. Even if there
was a Linux-32-only regression, I don't think it'd be worth our developers
spending time on it.


I agree. Kill them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DckrYRSsUA

Justin
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform