From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12223 invoked by alias); 19 May 2014 21:22:18 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 12201 invoked by uid 89); 19 May 2014 21:22:17 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-vc0-f170.google.com Received: from mail-vc0-f170.google.com (HELO mail-vc0-f170.google.com) (209.85.220.170) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 19 May 2014 21:22:15 +0000 Received: by mail-vc0-f170.google.com with SMTP id lf12so10456369vcb.1 for ; Mon, 19 May 2014 14:22:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=OEV/9U1SAPj9BqksNtxZF1HQl+XDO+U/7A1CTidL4T8=; b=AWStfuQN3OXj57cvm8gpnrUTC6dmMqBGBQkY2PiXD+JFbi5J5pHg1RjK9ihDsSoAec zdSoNT++xd/uAuKYS6r9o01eYxOQ27JynyegMjm9DKuado737mIDoyZ0nywkSWLEC+BV yHsbiH/cJRIHqzUm6GLcYpRhYVIiiZdDPaNRbv4X+eaUkMaiU5BwI0g4WX8ydMUX8Z5b qJ7NmHJNICp//9eH2Qm/LPVHj8zg/JFhMmfFa/UO+ad8jOdHbPjyXhMBvm09yO0DdJl6 vzi3B9vPB2qwt/fWAbKbdxQdbvYPOSCwIhjYQ15Dt+0m60SbcgLQRFpRW4QqZ3+1Nq1v hS4A== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlrR6sNMYh7BtmWVpZs2OYLi8vOb18ehlU6zxV40hHx63y5lj5Vbq187cHk8Jl08D5WtqRs MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.89.4 with SMTP id c4mr230594vcm.53.1400534533594; Mon, 19 May 2014 14:22:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.28.230 with HTTP; Mon, 19 May 2014 14:22:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140519143702.GC22822@adacore.com> References: <87bnutzwbj.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20140519142324.GB22822@adacore.com> <20140519143702.GC22822@adacore.com> Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 21:22:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] GDB/testsuite: Bump up `match_max' From: Doug Evans To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Tom Tromey , "Maciej W. Rozycki" , gdb-patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-05/txt/msg00379.txt.bz2 On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:37 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> > I wonder whether you timed the test suite? >> > The expect man page says: >> > >> > This may be changed with the function match_max. (Note that excessively >> > large values can slow down the pattern matcher.) >> > >> > If it is notably slower then it would be better to rewrite the macro >> > tests to avoid this need. >> >> Funny you would say that! I was reviewing the patch, and decided to >> do exactly that. Ran into trouble (fresh install), but almost there... > > Here are the results. As I hoped, it doesn't seem to introduce > any noticeable difference (at -j16 on an 8-thread machine). > > Before: 1093.79s user 153.20s system 589% cpu 3:31.68 total > After: 1097.58s user 155.08s system 589% cpu 3:32.39 total Hi. fwiw, I did several runs of before/after with the testsuite running serially and didn't find any statistical difference. All runs were in the range 14:07s to 14:25s elapsed, and sometimes with-patch was faster. Not unexpected I guess - most of the time what's actually in the buffer is pretty small, much less than the buffer size, so other factors would (generally) have more of an influence on run time.