You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
For a 64 core machine at a cycle count of ~16M, Jolt spends ~3.5% of its time in a segment called memory_trace_processinghere. This segment allocates and computes the offline memory checking (a,v,t) polynomials used for the combined registers and RAM. Some additional details can be found in the wiki.
Currently this ~300 line segment takes ~3.5% of end-to-end time because it is computed completely serially. No use of additional CPU cores. We should parallelize this to get up to a NUM_CPUx speedup.
The goal is to fill out the following.
Trace Length sized
a_ram
v_read
v_write_rd
v_write_ram
t_read
t_write_ram
Memory sized
v_final
t_final
It may be helpful to review the tracing strategy for performance testing.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
For a 64 core machine at a cycle count of ~16M, Jolt spends ~3.5% of its time in a segment called
memory_trace_processing
here. This segment allocates and computes the offline memory checking (a,v,t) polynomials used for the combined registers and RAM. Some additional details can be found in the wiki.Currently this ~300 line segment takes ~3.5% of end-to-end time because it is computed completely serially. No use of additional CPU cores. We should parallelize this to get up to a
NUM_CPU
x speedup.The goal is to fill out the following.
Trace Length sized
a_ram
v_read
v_write_rd
v_write_ram
t_read
t_write_ram
Memory sized
v_final
t_final
It may be helpful to review the tracing strategy for performance testing.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: