qt5base-lts/tests/benchmarks
Gatis Paeglis 41eefd7493 Deprecate QCoreApplication::flush()
... as it has outlived its original purpose:

Qt3 implementation on X11:
void QApplication::flush() { flushX(); }
void QApplication::flushX() { if (appDpy) XFlush( appDpy ); }

Qt4 implementation on X11:
Did nothing when QApplication::flush() was called (the flush()
overrides in {unix,glib} event dispatchers with empty bodies).

In Qt5 this function somehow has been repurposed (inconsistently)
to do what QCoreApplication::sendPostedEvents already does:

QAbstractEventDispatcher::flush() = 0;
 => QCocoaEventDispatcher::flush() {}
 => QEventDispatcherCoreFoundation::flush() {}
    => QIOSEventDispatcher (does not override ::flush())
 => QEventDispatcherGlib::flush() {}
    => QPAEventDispatcherGlib (does not override ::flush())
 => QEventDispatcherUNIX::flush() {}
    => QUnixEventDispatcherQPA (when QT_NO_GLIB=true)
       ::flush() { if (qApp) qApp->sendPostedEvents(); })
       ==> QAndroidEventDispatcher (does not override ::flush())
 => QEventDispatcherWin32::flush() {}
    => QOffscreenEventDispatcher::flush() {
         if (qApp) qApp->sendPostedEvents();
         QEventDispatcherWin32::flush();
       }
    => QWindowsGuiEventDispatcher (does not override ::flush())
       => QWindowsDirect2DEventDispatcher (does not override ::flush())
 => QEventDispatcherWinRT::flush() {}
    => QOffscreenEventDispatcher::flush() {
         if (qApp) qApp->sendPostedEvents();
         QEventDispatcherWinRT::flush();
       }
    => QWinRTEventDispatcher (qminimaleglintegration.cpp) (does not override ::flush())
    => QWinRTEventDispatcher (qwinrteventdispatcher.h) (does not override ::flush())

Whatever this function was doing on macOS in Qt3 and Qt4 also has been
dropped in Qt5. It appears that the other event dispatchers in Qt5 that
have overrides for flush() have simply copy-pasted this logic.

Clearly the documentation of QCoreApplication::flush() is outdated and
has nothing to do with the actual implementation in Qt5.

This function is rarely used in Qt5 sources. It should be safe to remove
the calls to QCoreApplication::flush() from Qt source code, as this
function has been doing nothing on most platforms anyways. Repurposing
it even broke handling of posted events (see QTBUG-48717).

[ChangeLog][QtCore][Event loop] QCoreApplication::flush() is now
deprecated. Use QCoreApplication::processEvents() and
QCoreApplication::sendPostedEvents() instead.

Task-number: QTBUG-33489
Task-number: QTBUG-48717
Change-Id: Icc7347ff203024b7153ea74be6bf527dd07ce821
Reviewed-by: Tor Arne Vestbø <tor.arne.vestbo@qt.io>
Reviewed-by: David Faure <david.faure@kdab.com>
Reviewed-by: Gunnar Sletta <gunnar@crimson.no>
2017-04-22 15:18:01 +00:00
..
corelib tests: Unify license to GPL-EXCEPT 2017-04-03 07:18:46 +00:00
dbus Use qtConfig throughout in qtbase 2016-08-19 04:28:05 +00:00
gui Deprecate QCoreApplication::flush() 2017-04-22 15:18:01 +00:00
network Modularize configure.json/.pri 2016-09-15 08:23:53 +00:00
opengl Updated license headers 2016-01-21 18:55:18 +00:00
plugins/imageformats/jpeg Updated license headers 2016-01-21 18:55:18 +00:00
sql Updated license headers 2016-01-21 18:55:18 +00:00
widgets Revert "Emit updateBlock signal in QTextDocumentLayout" 2016-07-27 06:46:04 +00:00
benchmarks.pro Revert "Emit updateBlock signal in QTextDocumentLayout" 2016-07-27 06:46:04 +00:00
README Whitespace cleanup: remove trailing whitespace 2013-03-16 20:22:50 +01:00
trusted-benchmarks.pri Initial import from the monolithic Qt. 2011-04-27 12:05:43 +02:00

The most reliable way of running benchmarks is to do it in an otherwise idle
system. On a busy system, the results will vary according to the other tasks
demanding attention in the system.

We have managed to obtain quite reliable results by doing the following on
Linux (and you need root):

 - switching the scheduler to a Real-Time mode
 - setting the processor affinity to one single processor
 - disabling the other thread of the same core

This should work rather well for CPU-intensive tasks. A task that is in Real-
Time mode will simply not be preempted by the OS. But if you make OS syscalls,
especially I/O ones, your task will be de-scheduled. Note that this includes
page faults, so if you can, make sure your benchmark's warmup code paths touch
most of the data.

To do this you need a tool called schedtool (package schedtool), from
http://freequaos.host.sk/schedtool/

From this point on, we are using CPU0 for all tasks:

If you have a Hyperthreaded multi-core processor (Core-i5 and Core-i7), you
have to disable the other thread of the same core as CPU0. To discover which
one it is:

$ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/topology/thread_siblings_list

This will print something like 0,4, meaning that CPUs 0 and 4 are sibling
threads on the same core. So we'll turn CPU 4 off:

(as root)
# echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/online

To turn it back on, echo 1 into the same file.

To run a task on CPU 0 exclusively, using FIFO RT priority 10, you run the
following:

(as root)
# schedtool -F -p 10 -a 1 -e ./taskname

For example:
# schedtool -F -p 10 -a 1 -e ./tst_bench_qstring -tickcounter

Warning: if your task livelocks or takes far too long to complete, your system
may be unusable for a long time, especially if you don't have other cores to
run stuff on. To prevent that, run it before schedtool and time it.

You can also limit the CPU time that the task is allowed to take. Run in the
same shell as you'll run schedtool:

$ ulimit -s 300
To limit to 300 seconds (5 minutes)

If your task runs away, it will get a SIGXCPU after consuming 5 minutes of CPU
time (5 minutes running at 100%).

If your app is multithreaded, you may want to give it more CPUs, like CPU0 and
CPU1 with -a 3  (it's a bitmask).

For best results, you should disable ALL other cores and threads of the same
processor. The new Core-i7 have one processor with 4 cores,
each core can run 2 threads; the older Mac Pros have two processors with 4
cores each. So on those Mac Pros, you'd disable cores 1, 2 and 3, while on the
Core-i7, you'll need to disable all other CPUs.

However, disabling just the sibling thread seems to produce very reliable
results for me already, with variance often below 0.5% (even though there are
some measurable spikes).

Other things to try:

Running the benchmark with highest priority, i.e. "sudo nice -19"
usually produces stable results on some machines. If the benchmark also
involves displaying something on the screen (on X11), running it with
"-sync" is a must. Though, in that case the "real" cost is not correct,
but it is useful to discover regressions.

Also; not many people know about ionice (1)
      ionice - get/set program io scheduling class and priority