May 2020 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

[Pharo 9.0] Build #306: SimplifyOCASTTranslater-by-tempVarNamesWithoutArguments

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #306 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #6336 was integrated: "SimplifyOCASTTranslater-by-tempVarNamesWithoutArguments" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/6336 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/SimplifyOCASTTranslater Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

May 20, 2020

[Pharo 9.0] Build #305: fix-profiling-menu-entries

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #305 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #6380 was integrated: "fix-profiling-menu-entries" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/6380 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/fix Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

May 20, 2020

[Pharo 9.0] Build #304: merge-spec2-0-6

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #304 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #6324 was integrated: "merge-spec2-0-6" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/6324 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/merge Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

May 20, 2020

[Pharo 9.0] Build #303: Fix Cairo bindings for PDF and SVG generation

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #303 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #6376 was integrated: "Fix Cairo bindings for PDF and SVG generation" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/6376 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/6374 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

May 20, 2020

[Pharo 9.0] Build #302: Removing slice and issue support

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #302 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #6370 was integrated: "Removing slice and issue support" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/6370 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/removing Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

May 19, 2020

[Pharo 9.0] Build #301: unload-enlumineur-ui

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #301 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #6364 was integrated: "unload-enlumineur-ui" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/6364 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/unload Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

May 19, 2020

[Pharo 9.0] Build #300: FixCompilerSettings

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #300 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #6358 was integrated: "FixCompilerSettings" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/6358 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/FixCompilerSettings Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

May 19, 2020

Re: [Pharo-dev] Squeak and Pharo speed differences

by Shaping

Another GUI-input speed observation: If you click the scroll wheel once to shift the text contents of the pane, the visual effect is very fast. I cannot detect any latency; it certainly is not close to what I see for text insertion/deletion, cursoring, and double-click selection. The slower operations all involve getting a damage rect at a specific point based on cursor position or click position. The faster scrolling function doesnât need to do that. It just grabs the entire visible rectangle minus one line, and blits it shifted down by one line, along with the one new line. That looks like an almost zero-cost collection of damage rects. Itâs a simple, fast calculation. Collection of damage rects for the slower operations looks much more expensive. The events involved in both cases are delivered to the target handler with the same latency. The slowness or quickness seems to have after that. Shaping Hence graphics output necessarily lags input on Morphic. So these speed differences have nothing to do with vm performance and everything to do with GUI architecture. Both Squeak and Pharo show the same delay for text selection latency. The architecture difference is not likely causing that. Given that both Pharo and Squeak useorphic and hence nothing have the same tender-in-step architecture isnât the fact that they show the sane performance issue evidence that points to precisely this being the cause? Yes, but not architecture, by which I think you mean the pushing of events versus the fixed-frequency regular loop in Morphic. I would expect a big variation in the Morphic case, but I donât know what the fixed frequency is; it could well under the noise floor. My first thought would be that getting the damage rects is the problem, but Iâve not seen the code. How do we index or look up the word rectangle to render? Iâm think that is more likely the cause. Is a map created at method compile time and updated after text is moved during edits? My understanding is that damage rectangles are retrieved, Right, but this is the potentially slow partâthe retrieving or perhaps more specifically mapping a point to a rectangle containing a contiguous sequence of non-whitespace character (a word). combined to produce a smaller (non-overlapping?) set, and that the entire morph tree is asked to render within these damage rectangles. You can read the gods for yourself. Itâll be a while. â¦. I just tried some new experiments. I should have thought of these earlier. Character insertion and cursoring in any direction by one character have the same latency. Collecting the damage rectangle at the cursor position and around the selected word are both taking about the same time as far as I can tell with my eye, and this time is longer than in VW or any Windows app. But VW doesnât use the Windows message queue directly. All incoming Windows events are converted to Smalltalk equivalents and are queued on the Smalltalk side. And it works well. Why not mimic that pattern to get the extra speed? Does something in Squeak/Pharo architecture prevent us from doing that? How do we set a multi-process time profiler running so that we donât need to eval blocks to get tallies. I just want to use the editor and watch method hit distribution. I see the Time profiler window; it seems to need a code snippet to work. How is the JIT code cache cleared? Dialect dependent. In Squeak/Pharo/Cuis IIRC Smalltalk voidCogVMState. Okay. Canât remember how itâs done in VW. CompiledMethod allInstancesWeakly do: [:compiledMethod | compiledMethod flushCachedVMCode] Baseline state: the only thing that comes to mind here is Collect All Garbage. Thereâs also Smalltalk garbageCollectMost which just runs a scavenge. IIRC someInstance has a side effect of running a scavenge in VW. Okay. and then ensure, through the relevant introspection primitives, What are these? What state features am I introspecting after the test? Sizes of heap subspaces? I can do Time microsecondsToRun: on the blocks. In Squeak/Pharo/Cuis see Smalltalk vmParameterAt: or Smalltalk vm parameterAt: and senders. Okay. I see this list: parameterAt: parameterIndex "parameterIndex is a positive integer corresponding to one of the VM's internal parameter/metric registers. Answer with the current value of that register. Fail if parameterIndex has no corresponding register. VM parameters are numbered as follows: 1 end (v3)/size(Spur) of old-space (0-based, read-only) 2 end (v3)/size(Spur) of young/new-space (read-only) 3 end (v3)/size(Spur) of heap (read-only) 4 nil (was allocationCount (read-only)) 5 nil (was allocations between GCs (read-write) 6 survivor count tenuring threshold (read-write) 7 full GCs since startup (read-only) 8 total milliseconds in full GCs since startup (read-only) 9 incremental GCs (SqueakV3) or scavenges (Spur) since startup (read-only) 10 total milliseconds in incremental GCs (SqueakV3) or scavenges (Spur) since startup (read-only) 11 tenures of surving objects since startup (read-only) 12-20 were specific to ikp's JITTER VM, now 12-19 are open for use 20 utc microseconds at VM start-up (actually at time initialization, which precedes image load). 21 root table size (read-only) 22 root table overflows since startup (read-only) 23 bytes of extra memory to reserve for VM buffers, plugins, etc (stored in image file header). 24 memory threshold above which shrinking object memory (rw) 25 memory headroom when growing object memory (rw) 26 interruptChecksEveryNms - force an ioProcessEvents every N milliseconds (rw) 27 number of times mark loop iterated for current IGC/FGC (read-only) includes ALL marking 28 number of times sweep loop iterated for current IGC/FGC (read-only) 29 number of times make forward loop iterated for current IGC/FGC (read-only) 30 number of times compact move loop iterated for current IGC/FGC (read-only) 31 number of grow memory requests (read-only) 32 number of shrink memory requests (read-only) 33 number of root table entries used for current IGC/FGC (read-only) 34 number of allocations done before current IGC/FGC (read-only) 35 number of survivor objects after current IGC/FGC (read-only) 36 millisecond clock when current IGC/FGC completed (read-only) 37 number of marked objects for Roots of the world, not including Root Table entries for current IGC/FGC (read-only) 38 milliseconds taken by current IGC (read-only) 39 Number of finalization signals for Weak Objects pending when current IGC/FGC completed (read-only) 40 BytesPerOop for this image 41 imageFormatVersion for the VM 42 number of stack pages in use 43 desired number of stack pages (stored in image file header, max 65535) 44 size of eden, in bytes 45 desired size of eden, in bytes (stored in image file header) 46 machine code zone size, in bytes (Cog only; otherwise nil) 47 desired machine code zone size (stored in image file header; Cog only; otherwise nil) 48 various header flags. See getCogVMFlags. 49 max size the image promises to grow the external semaphore table to (0 sets to default, which is 256 as of writing) 50-51 nil; reserved for VM parameters that persist in the image (such as eden above) 52 root table capacity 53 number of segments (Spur only; otherwise nil) 54 total size of free old space (Spur only, otherwise nil) 55 ratio of growth and image size at or above which a GC will be performed post scavenge 56 number of process switches since startup (read-only) 57 number of ioProcessEvents calls since startup (read-only) 58 number of ForceInterruptCheck calls since startup (read-only) 59 number of check event calls since startup (read-only) 60 number of stack page overflows since startup (read-only) 61 number of stack page divorces since startup (read-only) 62 compiled code compactions since startup (read-only; Cog only; otherwise nil) 63 total milliseconds in compiled code compactions since startup (read-only; Cog only; otherwise nil) 64 the number of methods that currently have jitted machine-code 65 whether the VM supports a certain feature, MULTIPLE_BYTECODE_SETS is bit 0, IMMTABILITY is bit 1 66 the byte size of a stack page 67 the max allowed size of old space (Spur only; nil otherwise; 0 implies no limit except that of the underlying platform) 68 the average number of live stack pages when scanned by GC (at scavenge/gc/become et al) 69 the maximum number of live stack pages when scanned by GC (at scavenge/gc/become et al) 70 the vmProxyMajorVersion (the interpreterProxy VM_MAJOR_VERSION) 71 the vmProxyMinorVersion (the interpreterProxy VM_MINOR_VERSION)" Shaping

May 19, 2020

Re: [Pharo-dev] Squeak and Pharo speed differences

by Shaping

Hence graphics output necessarily lags input on Morphic. So these speed differences have nothing to do with vm performance and everything to do with GUI architecture. Both Squeak and Pharo show the same delay for text selection latency. The architecture difference is not likely causing that. Given that both Pharo and Squeak useorphic and hence nothing have the same tender-in-step architecture isnât the fact that they show the sane performance issue evidence that points to precisely this being the cause? Yes, but not architecture, by which I think you mean the pushing of events versus the fixed-frequency regular loop in Morphic. I would expect a big variation in the Morphic case, but I donât know what the fixed frequency is; it could well under the noise floor. My first thought would be that getting the damage rects is the problem, but Iâve not seen the code. How do we index or look up the word rectangle to render? Iâm think that is more likely the cause. Is a map created at method compile time and updated after text is moved during edits? My understanding is that damage rectangles are retrieved, Right, but this is the potentially slow partâthe retrieving or perhaps more specifically mapping a point to a rectangle containing a contiguous sequence of non-whitespace character (a word). combined to produce a smaller (non-overlapping?) set, and that the entire morph tree is asked to render within these damage rectangles. You can read the gods for yourself. Itâll be a while. â¦. I just tried some new experiments. I should have thought of these earlier. Character insertion and cursoring in any direction by one character have the same latency. Collecting the damage rectangle at the cursor position and around the selected word are both taking about the same time as far as I can tell with my eye, and this time is longer than in VW or any Windows app. But VW doesnât use the Windows message queue directly. All incoming Windows events are converted to Smalltalk equivalents and are queued on the Smalltalk side. And it works well. Why not mimic that pattern to get the extra speed? Does something in Squeak/Pharo architecture prevent us from doing that? How do we set a multi-process time profiler running so that we donât need to eval blocks to get tallies. I just want to use the editor and watch method hit distribution. I see the Time profiler window; it seems to need a code snippet to work. How is the JIT code cache cleared? Dialect dependent. In Squeak/Pharo/Cuis IIRC Smalltalk voidCogVMState. Okay. Canât remember how itâs done in VW. CompiledMethod allInstancesWeakly do: [:compiledMethod | compiledMethod flushCachedVMCode] Baseline state: the only thing that comes to mind here is Collect All Garbage. Thereâs also Smalltalk garbageCollectMost which just runs a scavenge. IIRC someInstance has a side effect of running a scavenge in VW. Okay. and then ensure, through the relevant introspection primitives, What are these? What state features am I introspecting after the test? Sizes of heap subspaces? I can do Time microsecondsToRun: on the blocks. In Squeak/Pharo/Cuis see Smalltalk vmParameterAt: or Smalltalk vm parameterAt: and senders. Okay. I see this list: parameterAt: parameterIndex "parameterIndex is a positive integer corresponding to one of the VM's internal parameter/metric registers. Answer with the current value of that register. Fail if parameterIndex has no corresponding register. VM parameters are numbered as follows: 1 end (v3)/size(Spur) of old-space (0-based, read-only) 2 end (v3)/size(Spur) of young/new-space (read-only) 3 end (v3)/size(Spur) of heap (read-only) 4 nil (was allocationCount (read-only)) 5 nil (was allocations between GCs (read-write) 6 survivor count tenuring threshold (read-write) 7 full GCs since startup (read-only) 8 total milliseconds in full GCs since startup (read-only) 9 incremental GCs (SqueakV3) or scavenges (Spur) since startup (read-only) 10 total milliseconds in incremental GCs (SqueakV3) or scavenges (Spur) since startup (read-only) 11 tenures of surving objects since startup (read-only) 12-20 were specific to ikp's JITTER VM, now 12-19 are open for use 20 utc microseconds at VM start-up (actually at time initialization, which precedes image load). 21 root table size (read-only) 22 root table overflows since startup (read-only) 23 bytes of extra memory to reserve for VM buffers, plugins, etc (stored in image file header). 24 memory threshold above which shrinking object memory (rw) 25 memory headroom when growing object memory (rw) 26 interruptChecksEveryNms - force an ioProcessEvents every N milliseconds (rw) 27 number of times mark loop iterated for current IGC/FGC (read-only) includes ALL marking 28 number of times sweep loop iterated for current IGC/FGC (read-only) 29 number of times make forward loop iterated for current IGC/FGC (read-only) 30 number of times compact move loop iterated for current IGC/FGC (read-only) 31 number of grow memory requests (read-only) 32 number of shrink memory requests (read-only) 33 number of root table entries used for current IGC/FGC (read-only) 34 number of allocations done before current IGC/FGC (read-only) 35 number of survivor objects after current IGC/FGC (read-only) 36 millisecond clock when current IGC/FGC completed (read-only) 37 number of marked objects for Roots of the world, not including Root Table entries for current IGC/FGC (read-only) 38 milliseconds taken by current IGC (read-only) 39 Number of finalization signals for Weak Objects pending when current IGC/FGC completed (read-only) 40 BytesPerOop for this image 41 imageFormatVersion for the VM 42 number of stack pages in use 43 desired number of stack pages (stored in image file header, max 65535) 44 size of eden, in bytes 45 desired size of eden, in bytes (stored in image file header) 46 machine code zone size, in bytes (Cog only; otherwise nil) 47 desired machine code zone size (stored in image file header; Cog only; otherwise nil) 48 various header flags. See getCogVMFlags. 49 max size the image promises to grow the external semaphore table to (0 sets to default, which is 256 as of writing) 50-51 nil; reserved for VM parameters that persist in the image (such as eden above) 52 root table capacity 53 number of segments (Spur only; otherwise nil) 54 total size of free old space (Spur only, otherwise nil) 55 ratio of growth and image size at or above which a GC will be performed post scavenge 56 number of process switches since startup (read-only) 57 number of ioProcessEvents calls since startup (read-only) 58 number of ForceInterruptCheck calls since startup (read-only) 59 number of check event calls since startup (read-only) 60 number of stack page overflows since startup (read-only) 61 number of stack page divorces since startup (read-only) 62 compiled code compactions since startup (read-only; Cog only; otherwise nil) 63 total milliseconds in compiled code compactions since startup (read-only; Cog only; otherwise nil) 64 the number of methods that currently have jitted machine-code 65 whether the VM supports a certain feature, MULTIPLE_BYTECODE_SETS is bit 0, IMMTABILITY is bit 1 66 the byte size of a stack page 67 the max allowed size of old space (Spur only; nil otherwise; 0 implies no limit except that of the underlying platform) 68 the average number of live stack pages when scanned by GC (at scavenge/gc/become et al) 69 the maximum number of live stack pages when scanned by GC (at scavenge/gc/become et al) 70 the vmProxyMajorVersion (the interpreterProxy VM_MAJOR_VERSION) 71 the vmProxyMinorVersion (the interpreterProxy VM_MINOR_VERSION)" Shaping

May 19, 2020

Re: [Pharo-dev] Squeak and Pharo speed differences

by Eliot Miranda

Hi Shaping, > On May 18, 2020, at 6:52 PM, Shaping <shaping(a)uurda.org> wrote: > > ï»¿ > 1. Double-click text selection in both Squeak and Pharo shows a 75-100 ms latency (eye-balled, estimated) between end of double click (button up on second click) and time of highlighting of selected text. It could be as low as 60 ms, but I doubt it, and thatâs still too long. I canât track the latency in VW 8.3.2. Itâs too short, probably 30 ms or less, and is under my noise floor. Notepad latencies are even lower. The difference between VW and Notepad is not enough to complain about. Neither is noticeable in passing. The difference between VW and Pharo/Squeak latencies is a little painful/distracting. Itâs very much in your face, and you are keenly aware that you are waiting for something to happen before you can resume your thoughts about the code. > > 2. Stepping in the Pharo debugger is slow (Squeak is fine). The latencies between the step-click event and selection of the next evaluable is a solid 100 ms (again estimated). Feels more like 150-175 ms much of the time. This is actually hard to work with. > > Neither of these unequivocally demonstrates VM performance. > > I know. This comment is not about the VM. VM performance is another issue. This comment is only about general usability as a function of the latencies, whatever the cause. > > Both are more likely to derive from overall GUI architecture. > > Yup. > > In particular, VWâs display architecture is a direct stimulus-response i/o model where input results in a transformation producing immediate rendering, whereas Morphic is an animation architecture where input results in a new state but no rendering. The Morphic GUI is rendered separately on every âstepâ of the system. > > Okay. > > Hence graphics output necessarily lags input on Morphic. So these speed differences have nothing to do with vm performance and everything to do with GUI architecture. > > Both Squeak and Pharo show the same delay for text selection latency. The architecture difference is not likely causing that. Given that both Pharo and Squeak useorphic and hence nothing have the same tender-in-step architecture isnât the fact that they show the sane performance issue evidence that points to precisely this being the cause? > How do we index or look up the word rectangle to render? Iâm think that is more likely the cause. Is a map created at method compile time and updated after text is moved during edits? My understanding is that damage rectangles are retrieved, combined to produce a smaller (non-overlapping?) set, and that the entire morph tree is asked to render within these damage rectangles. You can read the gods for yourself. > Where is VisualWorks significantly faster than either Squeak or Pharo? > > VW 8.3.2 faster: > > 1. Text selection. > > 2. Repeat-key rate in VW is smoother (not perfect; I see a few pauses). Pharoâs repeat-key rate is the same or a little slower, there are more pauses, and distribution of those pause-times is slightly wider for Pharo 9, as if event flow isnât as smooth as it could be (because text/cursor rendering is a not efficient?). This is a minor issue, not a practical problem. I did the test in a workspace in both cases. > > > Pharo 9 same or faster: > > Everything else in the GUI, like window openings/closings, menu openings/closings work at nearly the same speed, or Pharo 9 is faster. > > Opening a system browser in VW 8.3.2 and Pharo 9 takes about the same time. If you scrutinize, you can see that Pharo system browser open times are often about 2/3 to 4/5 of the VW times. This action is never faster in VW. > > Popup menus in Pharo 9 are noticeably faster than those in VW 8.3.2. Instant--delightful. > > > Specifically which VisualWorks VM or lower level facilities are much faster than the Cog VM? Do you have benchmarks? > > No, I donât, but I find the subject interesting, and would like to pursue it. Iâm trying to get some pressing work done in VW (as I contemplate jumping ship to Pharo/Squeak). Itâs not a good time for excursions, but here I am playing with Squeak/Pharo, anyway. I want to dig deeper at some future date. > > Do you have a specific procedure you like to use when benchmarking the VW VM? > > Any VM. Express the benchmark as a block. If the benchmark is not trying to measure JIT and/or GC overhead then before the block is run make sure to put the vm in some initialized state wrt hitting and/or GC, eg by voiding the JIT code cache, > > How is the JIT code cache cleared? Dialect dependent. In Squeak/Pharo/Cuis IIRC Smalltalk voidCogVMState. Canât remember how itâs done in VW. > and/or forcing a scavenge or a global GC. Then run the block twice, reporting itâs second iteration, to ensure all code is JITted. > > Okay, so the above procedure tests execution-engine efficiency apart from JIT and GC efficiency. > > If attempting to measure JIT and/or GC overhead then do the same wet getting the vm to some baseline consistent initial state > > Baseline state: the only thing that comes to mind here is Collect All Garbage. Thereâs also Smalltalk garbageCollectMost which just runs a scavenge. IIRC someInstance has a side effect of running a scavenge in VW. > > and then ensure, through the relevant introspection primitives, > > What are these? What state features am I introspecting after the test? Sizes of heap subspaces? I can do Time microsecondsToRun: on the blocks. In Squeak/Pharo/Cuis see Smalltalk vmParameterAt: or Smalltalk vm parameterAt: and senders. > that after the benchmark has run the events desired to be benchmarked have actually taken place. > > Iâm thinking most checks on state will involve running more Smalltalk, not just primitives. > > If a micobenchmark then ensure that eg loop, block invocation, arithmetic, overheads are either minimised wrt the code being benchmarked or subtracted from the code being benchmarked. > > Okay. > > i.e. make sure the benchmark is repeatable (benchmark an initial used state). make sure the benchmark measures what is intended to be benchmarked and not some overhead. > > Right. I donât see how to guarantee some known starting state except to collect all garbage. See answers above. > Shaping

May 19, 2020