Hi Caio, > On Oct 6, 2018, at 7:30 AM, Caio Lima <ticaiol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi all. > > I'm starting working to fix JIT support of BigInt in some operations > we already have upstream. In such case, I'm sending > (free online bettinghttps://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=186177) to support BigInt > speculation into ValueAdd node. As I want to know if BigInt > speculation represents some performance improvement, I'm also > proposing a new benchmark suite called BigIntBench. The idea right now > is to enable us to write microbenchmarks while working into JIT fixes. > The main reason behind that is due the practicality of enabling > "--useBigInt=true" flags for tests in this suite. The big plan is to > move all microbenchmarks to "JSTests/microbenchmarks" and then add > relevant tests to evaluate how fast JSC can manipulate BigInts. IIRC, > Robin Morisset mentioned about introducing some benchmarks to evaluate > BigInt implementation sometime ago. > > What do you think about that? Does it make sense? I think it makes a lot of sense to start using benchmarks to drive performance improvements in our BigInt implementation.
It's probably good to use both microbenchmarks and macro benchmarks to do this. I definitely agree it's worth writing microbenchmarks to show that changes are good for perf. But it's probably worth converting some preexisting benchmarks to use BigInts and measure performance on that as well. Some ideas could be taking some of the math-heavy benchmarks from JetStream/Kraken as a starting point. - Saam > > Regards, > Caio. > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > firstname.lastname@example.org > free online bettinghttps://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list email@example.com https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev