Add benchmark for add op. #40059
Closed
Add benchmark for add op. #40059
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Summary: This benchmark is added specifically for mobile to see if compiler is autovectorizing and thus we have no advantage of neon backend for vec256 for add op. Test Plan: CI Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: [ghstack-poisoned]
This was referenced Jun 15, 2020
💊 CI failures summary and remediationsAs of commit f1f40a1 (more details on the Dr. CI page): 💚 💚 Looks good so far! There are no failures yet. 💚 💚 This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI (expand for details).Follow this link to opt-out of these comments for your Pull Requests.Please report bugs/suggestions on the GitHub issue tracker or post in the (internal) Dr. CI Users group. This comment has been revised 15 times. |
Summary: This benchmark is added specifically for mobile to see if compiler is autovectorizing and thus we have no advantage of neon backend for vec256 for add op. Test Plan: CI Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: [D22055146](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D22055146) [ghstack-poisoned]
| at::Tensor a = at::rand({batchSize, channels}); | ||
| at::Tensor b = at::rand({batchSize, channels}); | ||
| at::Tensor c; | ||
| for (auto _ : state) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure whether this runs, for a benchmark, the risk of getting optimized out considering the contents of this loop are invariant.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You mean the entire loop is optimized away?
This is how you are supposed to use google benchmark it seems: https://github.com/google/benchmark. Also qnnpack benchmarks are similarly written.
Also the next PR in the stack has the result of running this benchmark. From that it does not seem to be case.
|
LGTM |
dreiss
approved these changes
Jun 17, 2020
| CAFFE2_USE_MSVC_STATIC_RUNTIME "Using MSVC static runtime libraries" ON | ||
| "NOT BUILD_SHARED_LIBS" OFF) | ||
| option(BUILD_TEST "Build C++ test binaries (need gtest and gbenchmark)" OFF) | ||
| option(BUILD_MOBILE_BENCHMARKS "Build C++ test binaries for mobile (ARM) targets(need gtest and gbenchmark)" OFF) |
Summary: This benchmark is added specifically for mobile to see if compiler is autovectorizing and thus we have no advantage of neon backend for vec256 for add op. Test Plan: CI Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: [D22055146](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D22055146) [ghstack-poisoned]
Summary: This benchmark is added specifically for mobile to see if compiler is autovectorizing and thus we have no advantage of neon backend for vec256 for add op. Test Plan: CI Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: [D22055146](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D22055146) [ghstack-poisoned]
Summary: This benchmark is added specifically for mobile to see if compiler is autovectorizing and thus we have no advantage of neon backend for vec256 for add op. Test Plan: CI Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: [D22055146](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D22055146) [ghstack-poisoned]
Summary: This benchmark is added specifically for mobile to see if compiler is autovectorizing and thus we have no advantage of neon backend for vec256 for add op. Test Plan: CI Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: [D22055146](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D22055146) [ghstack-poisoned]
Summary: This benchmark is added specifically for mobile to see if compiler is autovectorizing and thus we have no advantage of neon backend for vec256 for add op. Test Plan: CI Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: [D22055146](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D22055146) [ghstack-poisoned]
Summary: This benchmark is added specifically for mobile to see if compiler is autovectorizing and thus we have no advantage of neon backend for vec256 for add op. Test Plan: CI Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: [D22055146](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D22055146) [ghstack-poisoned]
|
This pull request has been merged in bddba1e. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Stack from ghstack:
Summary:
This benchmark is added specifically for mobile to see if compiler is
autovectorizing and thus we have no advantage of neon backend for vec256
for add op.
Test Plan:
CI
Reviewers:
Subscribers:
Tasks:
Tags:
Differential Revision: D22055146