RESOLVED FIXED 76132
Need a script to run tests in PerformanceTests
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=76132
Summary Need a script to run tests in PerformanceTests
Ryosuke Niwa
Reported 2012-01-11 17:15:01 PST
We already have perftestsrunner for inspector tests per http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/101618. We should extend this script to be able to run other performance tests.
Attachments
work in progress (6.96 KB, patch)
2012-01-11 17:34 PST, Ryosuke Niwa
no flags
Patch (16.96 KB, patch)
2012-01-12 02:07 PST, Ryosuke Niwa
no flags
Added a change log entry (17.31 KB, patch)
2012-01-12 02:11 PST, Ryosuke Niwa
abarth: review+
Ryosuke Niwa
Comment 1 2012-01-11 17:33:16 PST
The change log entry in http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/101618 seems to imply this script is meant to be used by some chromium perf bots. Did that happen already or are we still in the process of improving the script?
Ryosuke Niwa
Comment 2 2012-01-11 17:34:30 PST
Created attachment 122142 [details] work in progress With this patch, the script output will look like: rniwa-macpro:webkit4 rniwa$ Tools/Scripts/run-perf-tests Bindings Running Bindings/event-target-wrapper.html (1 of 1) RESULT 1057.6
Adam Barth
Comment 3 2012-01-11 17:38:35 PST
Comment on attachment 122142 [details] work in progress View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=122142&action=review > Tools/Scripts/run-inspector-perf-tests.py:41 > - sys.exit(PerfTestsRunner('inspector').run()) > + sys.exit(PerfTestsRunner('inspector').run(inspector_tests=True)) Should the inspector have a subclass of PerfTestsRunner?
Ryosuke Niwa
Comment 4 2012-01-11 18:04:37 PST
Comment on attachment 122142 [details] work in progress View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=122142&action=review >> Tools/Scripts/run-inspector-perf-tests.py:41 >> + sys.exit(PerfTestsRunner('inspector').run(inspector_tests=True)) > > Should the inspector have a subclass of PerfTestsRunner? Oops, this change is a left over. Ideally, we should be able to run all perf tests and get the output in the same format so probably not.
Ryosuke Niwa
Comment 5 2012-01-12 02:07:54 PST
Ryosuke Niwa
Comment 6 2012-01-12 02:11:41 PST
Created attachment 122193 [details] Added a change log entry
Adam Barth
Comment 7 2012-01-12 11:12:03 PST
Comment on attachment 122193 [details] Added a change log entry What is a Chromium-style test?
Ryosuke Niwa
Comment 8 2012-01-12 11:14:44 PST
(In reply to comment #7) > (From update of attachment 122193 [details]) > What is a Chromium-style test? It's a test outputs the result that Chromium perf bots can parse natively.
Adam Barth
Comment 9 2012-01-12 13:41:56 PST
> It's a test outputs the result that Chromium perf bots can parse natively. Is it a good format? Should we change out PerformanceTests to match?
Adam Barth
Comment 10 2012-01-12 13:42:59 PST
Comment on attachment 122193 [details] Added a change log entry This looks ok. I wish we didn't have two different formats to parse, but maybe that's not super important.
Ryosuke Niwa
Comment 11 2012-01-12 14:03:07 PST
(In reply to comment #9) > > It's a test outputs the result that Chromium perf bots can parse natively. > > Is it a good format? Should we change out PerformanceTests to match? No, it's actually hideous looks like: RESULT Bindings: event-target-wrapper= 1033.3 ms RESULT panel-switch: show-panel-elements= 10 ms RESULT panel-switch: show-panel-resources= 13 ms RESULT panel-switch: show-panel-network= 38 ms RESULT panel-switch: show-panel-scripts= 20 ms RESULT panel-switch: show-panel-timeline= 12 ms RESULT panel-switch: show-panel-profiles= 10 ms RESULT panel-switch: show-panel-audits= 7 ms RESULT panel-switch: show-panel-console= 13 ms RESULT heap-delta: show-panel= 0 kB
Ryosuke Niwa
Comment 12 2012-01-12 14:08:47 PST
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.