| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This seems to be ~100x higher resolution than QueryPerformanceCounter. AFAIK, all our Windows perf bots have constant_tsc, so we can be a bit more direct about using rdtsc directly: it'll always tick at the max CPU frequency.
Now, the question remains, what is the max CPU frequency to divide through by? It looks like QueryPerformanceFrequency actually gives the CPU frequency in kHz, suspiciously exactly what we need to divide through to get elapsed milliseconds. That was a freebie.
I did some before/after comparison on slow benchmarks. Timings look the same. Going to land this without review tonight to see what happens on the bots; happy to review carefully tomorrow.
R=mtklein@google.com
TBR=bungeman
BUG=skia:
Review URL: https://codereview.chromium.org/394363003
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
NOTREECHECKS=true
BUG=skia:
R=bsalomon@google.com, mtklein@google.com
Author: mtklein@chromium.org
Review URL: https://codereview.chromium.org/393673006
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
BUG=skia:
R=egdaniel@google.com, mtklein@google.com
Author: mtklein@chromium.org
Review URL: https://codereview.chromium.org/392583005
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Give this a try? Helpful, or gets in the way?
BUG=skia:
R=krajcevski@google.com, mtklein@google.com
Author: mtklein@chromium.org
Review URL: https://codereview.chromium.org/390483002
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
BUG=skia:
R=krajcevski@google.com, mtklein@google.com
Author: mtklein@chromium.org
Review URL: https://codereview.chromium.org/377283002
|
|
|
- use high-precision wall timer only
- warm caches once before measuring
- measure independent samples, calculating statistics
- add --verbose to control how much data we output
Also removed some unloved features from bench_record.
BUG=skia:
R=jcgregorio@google.com, mtklein@google.com
Author: mtklein@chromium.org
Review URL: https://codereview.chromium.org/338203002
|
Mike Klein
mtklein