From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Olivier Dion via General Guile related discussions Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Looking for a computation benchmark in Guile Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2022 13:35:02 -0500 Message-ID: <87fseqodyh.fsf@laura> Reply-To: Olivier Dion Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="32911"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" To: guile-user@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 10 19:35:47 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1otCOx-0008Pw-4V for guile-user@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 19:35:47 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1otCOR-00064u-Ur; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 13:35:16 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1otCOQ-00064W-QM for guile-user@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 13:35:14 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca ([132.207.4.11]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1otCON-0004uw-5w for guile-user@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 13:35:14 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (modemcable094.169-200-24.mc.videotron.ca [24.200.169.94]) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 2AAIZ2qh004011 for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 13:35:07 -0500 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp.polymtl.ca 2AAIZ2qh004011 X-Poly-FromMTA: (modemcable094.169-200-24.mc.videotron.ca [24.200.169.94]) at Thu, 10 Nov 2022 18:35:02 +0000 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.207.4.11; envelope-from=olivier.dion@polymtl.ca; helo=smtp.polymtl.ca X-Spam_score_int: -41 X-Spam_score: -4.2 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.lisp.guile.user:18719 Archived-At: Hi, In my research on dynamic instrumentation, I would like to see what's the runtime overhead of dynamically patching function entry/exit with my tool. I can already patch every libguile function dynamically, I just need to see what's the impact on the runtime now. Here's the specification of such benchmark: 1. No I/O 2. No delimited computation (no rewind of the stack) 3. No foreign call 4. Can be multi-thread (would be great actually) 5. Reproducible (pure computation are great candidate) Also, maybe there's already standardized benchmark also for Scheme. If so a link to them or an implementation in Guile would be awesome. If you have a scenario like that, please contact me! -- Olivier Dion oldiob.dev