Skip to content

testing: tiny benchmark with StopTimer runs forever #27217

Open

Description

@peterGo

From at least Go 1,4 onward,

$ go version
go version devel +e03220a594 Sat Aug 25 02:39:49 2018 +0000 linux/amd64
$

If we run a tiny benchmark (count++) and use StopTimer() for initialization (count = 0) then the benchmark runs for a very long time, perhaps forever.

$ cat tiny_test.go
package main

import (
	"testing"
)

var count int64

func BenchmarkTiny(b *testing.B) {
	for n := 0; n < b.N; n++ {
		b.StopTimer()
		count = 0
		b.StartTimer()
		count++
	}
}
$
$ go test tiny_test.go -bench=.
goos: linux
goarch: amd64
BenchmarkTiny-4   	^Csignal: interrupt
FAIL	command-line-arguments	143.633s
$

If we comment out StopTimer() (//b.StopTimer()) then the benchmark quickly runs to completion.

$ cat tiny_test.go
package main

import (
	"testing"
)

var count int64

func BenchmarkTiny(b *testing.B) {
	for n := 0; n < b.N; n++ {
		// b.StopTimer()
		count = 0
		b.StartTimer()
		count++
	}
}
$
$ go test tiny_test.go -bench=.
goos: linux
goarch: amd64
BenchmarkTiny-4   	1000000000	         2.15 ns/op
PASS
ok  	command-line-arguments	2.374s
$ 

Activity

  1. changed the title [-]testing: tiny benchmarks with StopTimer run forever[/-] [+]testing: tiny benchmark with StopTimer runs forever[/+] on Aug 25, 2018
  2. added
    NeedsInvestigationSomeone must examine and confirm this is a valid issue and not a duplicate of an existing one.
    on Aug 25, 2018
  3. added this to the Go1.12 milestone on Aug 25, 2018
  4. meirf commented on Aug 25, 2018

    @meirf
    Contributor

    runtime.ReadMemStats which is called by both StartTimer and StopTimer is known to be slow, though I'm not sure it's expected to be as slow as shown here.

    Calling just StartTimer without StopTimer is a noop because b.timerOn is true.

    The uses of StartTimer/StopTimer are usually around one time setup/teardown code that happens before or after the b.N loop.

  5. josharian commented on Aug 26, 2018

    @josharian
    Contributor

    I suspect that this is (effectively) a duplicate of #20875.

  6. mvdan commented on Jan 13, 2019

    @mvdan
    Member

    I encountered the same while benchmarking fairly small functions. Via pprof, I could see that ReadMemStats (called via both StartTimer and StopTimer) was taking up ~90% of the CPU time, while the func I was benchmarking was only taking about 3% of CPU time.

    Initially, I too thought that go test -bench=. would never end. But that wasn't the problem.

    For example, go test -bench=. -benchtime=100x runs fine. The issue is that when given a benchtime in a duration instead of number of iterations, the testing package has to estimate the number of times it will need to execute the benchmark loop.

    And this is where it gets whacky. For example, on go test -bench=. -benchtime=0.1s, the total run-time ends up being over 6s on my machine. This seems to indicate that the b.N estimate that the testing package ends up with is way too high, as the time it spends running the benchmark is over 50 times larger than what the user wanted.

    So I presume this is what you're seeing. By default the benchtime is 1s, so it's reasonable to think that your tiny benchmark could be slowed down enough to run for a few minutes. I'd suggest trying to run it with -benchtime=100x or -benchtime=0.01s to confirm that it's only the estimate that is wrong.

    In which case I agree with @josharian that the root of the issue is #20875. If ReadMemStats wasn't called that often, I presume that the b.N estimates wouldn't be nearly as bad.

  7. mvdan commented on Jan 13, 2019

    @mvdan
    Member

    Looks like other people ran into very similar puzzling cases before: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/37620251/golang-benchmarking-b-stoptimer-hangs-is-it-me

  8. josharian commented on Jan 13, 2019

    @josharian
    Contributor

    This seems to indicate that the b.N estimate that the testing package ends up with is way too high

    Note that if the goal is for the benchmark code to execute for 1s, and there's 97% overhead due to StopTimer/StartTimer, then the correct overall execution time is 33s. So maybe the b.N estimate is correct.

    Note that we should make the b.N estimate better. CL 112155 is an attempt at this. It needs to be revisited. There's also discussion of this at #24735. See also
    #27168 (comment).

    I've also thought for some time that we should set an absolute limit on b.N. To mangle Tolstoy: How many iterations does one benchmark need? If we capped b.N at something reasonably sized, like 100k, that'd mitigate these disaster scenarios. And also general speed up running microbenchmarks. (I suppose I should file a new issue for this?)

  9. modified the milestones: Go1.12, Go1.13 on Feb 12, 2019
  10. modified the milestones: Go1.13, Go1.14 on Jul 8, 2019
  11. modified the milestones: Go1.14, Backlog on Oct 9, 2019
  12. 1 remaining item

  13. gopherbot commented on Sep 26, 2020

    @gopherbot
    Contributor

    Change https://golang.org/cl/257647 mentions this issue: testing: grow benchmark iteration incrementally

  14. changkun commented on Sep 26, 2020

    @changkun
    Member

    I've encountered this issue many many times in the past. Today again, it is so sad that the issue is still open. So I sent a CL and hope this could be closed.

  15. dangoodman commented on Feb 28, 2025

    @dangoodman

    Spent a couple hours figuring out what's wrong with my benchmarks since they run indefinitely. Just to find out that's the core issue. There should be a warning or other way to signal that rapid calls to StartTimer/StopTimer will make it run indefinitely or very long.

  16. thepudds commented on Apr 2, 2025

    @thepudds
    Member

    I had hoped there was some chance b.Loop might magically fix this issue, including there were some hints in some of the proposal discussions, such as #61515 (comment):

    Given all of this, I think we could make testing.B.Loop target a real time rather than a benchmark time.

    A quick test though seems to suggest that this problem still seems to occur with b.Loop.

    If I update the example from the top comment above to instead use b.Loop and then do go test -bench=. -benchtime=1s, it runs a very long time. I killed it after ~10 minutes. It seems to spend most of its time in the kernel (perhaps getting the current time).

    var count int64
    
    func BenchmarkTinyBLoop(b *testing.B) {
    	for b.Loop() {
    		b.StopTimer()
    		count = 0
    		b.StartTimer()
    		count++
    	}
    }

    CC @JunyangShao, @aclements, if interested.

    edit: I should have mentioned the test was with tip as of earlier today (go version devel go1.25-116b823 Wed Apr 2 11:25:15 2025 -0700 linux/amd64).

  17. cyphar commented on Sep 6, 2025

    @cyphar
    Contributor

    I just ran into this when adding benchmarks to #70672.

    It would be nice for there to at least be some kind of check if the benchmarking code is taking far more than the expected -benchtime (let's say 3-5x?) and output a warning with a link to this issue (given that it's a known issue for at least 7 years with very little progress).

  18. added a commit that references this issue on Sep 6, 2025
  19. gopherbot commented on Sep 6, 2025

    @gopherbot
    Contributor

    Change https://go.dev/cl/633515 mentions this issue: os: optimise cgo clearenv

  20. added a commit that references this issue on Sep 9, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    NeedsInvestigationSomeone must examine and confirm this is a valid issue and not a duplicate of an existing one.

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions