Drop release-fast profile for simplicity by oech3 · Pull Request #10476 · uutils/coreutils

oech3 · 2026-01-25T05:34:09Z

Closes #10470 . preliminary for #10368 to reduce binary size.

codspeed-hq · 2026-01-25T05:48:39Z

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging this PR will improve performance by 32.04%

_{Comparing oech3:pro (9787b41) with main (5e5968c)¹}

Summary

⚡ 11 improved benchmarks
✅ 273 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 38 skipped benchmarks²

Performance Changes

	Mode	Benchmark	`BASE`	`HEAD`	Efficiency
⚡	Simulation	`sort_key_field[500000]`	1,028.7 ms	853.4 ms	+20.54%
⚡	Simulation	`seq_formatted`	96.5 ms	93.6 ms	+3.16%
⚡	Simulation	`seq_with_step`	14.1 ms	13.6 ms	+3.29%
⚡	Simulation	`seq_integers`	27.6 ms	26.7 ms	+3.24%
⚡	Simulation	`cut_fields_tab`	34.8 ms	27.3 ms	+27.7%
⚡	Simulation	`cut_fields_custom_delim`	41.3 ms	31.3 ms	+32.04%
⚡	Simulation	`file_custom_format`	13.3 ms	11.8 ms	+12.3%
⚡	Simulation	`file_iso_dates`	13.8 ms	12.4 ms	+11.18%
⚡	Simulation	`file_tz_abbreviations`	18.3 ms	17 ms	+7.39%
⚡	Simulation	`nl_many_lines[100000]`	46.1 ms	42.9 ms	+7.52%
⚡	Simulation	`nl_large_file[10]`	58.8 ms	54.6 ms	+7.62%

No successful run was found on main (b556119) during the generation of this report, so 5e5968c was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩
38 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩

github-actions · 2026-01-25T10:23:17Z

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skipping an intermittent issue tests/shuf/shuf-reservoir (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/sort/sort-stale-thread-mem (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/tty/tty-eof (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Congrats! The gnu test tests/tail/retry is no longer failing!

github-actions · 2026-01-25T11:13:19Z

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skipping an intermittent issue tests/shuf/shuf-reservoir (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/sort/sort-stale-thread-mem (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/tty/tty-eof (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Congrats! The gnu test tests/tail/retry is no longer failing!

oech3 · 2026-01-25T11:29:24Z

@blyxxyz Any idea about performance regression or shuf with codegen-units=1?

github-actions · 2026-01-25T12:19:26Z

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skipping an intermittent issue tests/shuf/shuf-reservoir (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/sort/sort-stale-thread-mem (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/tty/tty-eof (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Congrats! The gnu test tests/tail/retry is no longer failing!

blyxxyz · 2026-01-25T12:53:36Z

I don't know.

shuf_input_range might benefit from an inlined itoa so codegen-units could affect it for that reason. But I'm not sure that inlining really matters, though I do know that itoa is a bottleneck.

shuf is inherently random so the benchmarks could also be flaky for that reason. To make it deterministic you can add a --random-seed=abcdef option.

oech3 · 2026-01-25T13:05:35Z

To clarify, performance regression was caused by cgu=1 before your commit.
If we freeze seeds of benches, it should be different PR.

github-actions · 2026-01-25T14:31:11Z

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skipping an intermittent issue tests/shuf/shuf-reservoir (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/sort/sort-stale-thread-mem (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/tty/tty-eof (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Congrats! The gnu test tests/tail/retry is no longer failing!

github-actions · 2026-01-25T15:16:18Z

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skipping an intermittent issue tests/shuf/shuf-reservoir (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/sort/sort-stale-thread-mem (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/tty/tty-eof (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Congrats! The gnu test tests/tail/retry is no longer failing!

github-actions · 2026-01-25T15:37:05Z

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skip an intermittent issue tests/tail/inotify-dir-recreate (fails in this run but passes in the 'main' branch)

github-actions · 2026-01-25T16:24:41Z

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skipping an intermittent issue tests/tty/tty-eof (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)

github-actions · 2026-01-25T16:38:54Z

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skip an intermittent issue tests/shuf/shuf-reservoir (fails in this run but passes in the 'main' branch)
Skip an intermittent issue tests/sort/sort-stale-thread-mem (fails in this run but passes in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/tty/tty-eof (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)

github-actions · 2026-01-25T17:24:44Z

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skip an intermittent issue tests/shuf/shuf-reservoir (fails in this run but passes in the 'main' branch)
Skip an intermittent issue tests/sort/sort-stale-thread-mem (fails in this run but passes in the 'main' branch)

oech3 · 2026-01-25T22:43:43Z

shuf_input_range[1000000] 126.3 ms 130.6 ms -3.3%. This is not one covered by #10478 ...

oech3 · 2026-01-27T18:54:07Z

@sylvestre Do you accept shuf regression for 11 benches at #10476 (comment) ?

github-actions · 2026-01-31T19:20:41Z

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skipping an intermittent issue tests/tail/inotify-dir-recreate (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)

oech3 · 2026-02-02T12:49:40Z

Let's see rustc-hash + cgu=1 performance.

github-actions · 2026-02-02T12:59:31Z

GNU testsuite comparison:

Congrats! The gnu test tests/basenc/bounded-memory is now passing!

oech3 · 2026-02-02T13:08:29Z

96.1 ms -> 93.8 ms at [shuf_input_range[1000000]!
But expand and unexpand hyper regress...

github-actions · 2026-02-02T15:45:40Z

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skipping an intermittent issue tests/shuf/shuf-reservoir (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/sort/sort-stale-thread-mem (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)

oech3 · 2026-02-04T05:40:04Z

Including #10657

github-actions · 2026-02-04T05:49:14Z

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skipping an intermittent issue tests/tail/inotify-dir-recreate (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)

github-actions · 2026-02-04T12:23:49Z

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skipping an intermittent issue tests/tail/inotify-dir-recreate (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)

oech3 · 2026-02-05T12:11:57Z

I think we can force cgu=16 for *expand binaries, but I think it is impossible for multi-call binary.

oech3 · 2026-02-05T13:07:03Z

Merging this PR will improve performance by 32.04%

Maybe, ready to merge this. We don't bench multi-call binary's perf already.

oech3 marked this pull request as ready for review January 25, 2026 05:57

This comment was marked as resolved.

Sign in to view

oech3 force-pushed the pro branch from 3fd4f53 to 7023c93 Compare January 25, 2026 10:11

oech3 force-pushed the pro branch from 7023c93 to ebecca4 Compare January 25, 2026 11:00

oech3 force-pushed the pro branch from ebecca4 to c535da6 Compare January 25, 2026 12:10

oech3 marked this pull request as draft January 25, 2026 12:35

oech3 force-pushed the pro branch 2 times, most recently from 787c9e3 to cf2d9be Compare January 25, 2026 14:22

oech3 force-pushed the pro branch from cf2d9be to b517f29 Compare January 25, 2026 15:05

oech3 mentioned this pull request Jan 25, 2026

shuf: Tune performance for -i 1-1000000 #10478

Merged

oech3 force-pushed the pro branch 2 times, most recently from 1ce96cb to 2ac1bcd Compare January 25, 2026 15:26

oech3 force-pushed the pro branch 5 times, most recently from 9a94722 to e3b1118 Compare January 25, 2026 16:24

This comment was marked as resolved.

Sign in to view

oech3 force-pushed the pro branch 2 times, most recently from 08e1379 to 3cb141d Compare January 25, 2026 17:09

oech3 marked this pull request as draft January 25, 2026 18:14

oech3 force-pushed the pro branch from 3cb141d to e063e9b Compare January 25, 2026 21:55

oech3 marked this pull request as ready for review January 25, 2026 21:55

oech3 mentioned this pull request Jan 26, 2026

shuf: Performance regression with codegen-units=1 #10486

Closed

oech3 force-pushed the pro branch from e063e9b to a41ab4e Compare January 31, 2026 19:12

oech3 force-pushed the pro branch from a41ab4e to 843b7b6 Compare February 2, 2026 12:48

oech3 mentioned this pull request Feb 2, 2026

(un)expand: Performance regression with codegen-units=1 #10654

Open

oech3 force-pushed the pro branch from 843b7b6 to c830d43 Compare February 2, 2026 15:32

oech3 force-pushed the pro branch from c830d43 to cbaa29f Compare February 4, 2026 05:39

oech3 force-pushed the pro branch from cbaa29f to cca2631 Compare February 4, 2026 10:53

sylvestre force-pushed the pro branch from cca2631 to 9d2d712 Compare February 4, 2026 20:34

Drop release-fast profile for simplicity

9787b41

oech3 force-pushed the pro branch from 9d2d712 to 9787b41 Compare February 5, 2026 12:18

sylvestre merged commit bdf3b82 into uutils:main Feb 6, 2026
156 checks passed

oech3 deleted the pro branch February 7, 2026 04:40

Uh oh!

Conversation

oech3 commented Jan 25, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq bot commented Jan 25, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging this PR will improve performance by 32.04%

Summary

Performance Changes

Footnotes

Uh oh!

This comment was marked as resolved.

github-actions bot commented Jan 25, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 25, 2026

Uh oh!

oech3 commented Jan 25, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 25, 2026

Uh oh!

blyxxyz commented Jan 25, 2026

Uh oh!

oech3 commented Jan 25, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 25, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 25, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 25, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 25, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment was marked as resolved.

github-actions bot commented Jan 25, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 25, 2026

Uh oh!

oech3 commented Jan 25, 2026

Uh oh!

oech3 commented Jan 27, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 31, 2026

Uh oh!

oech3 commented Feb 2, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 2, 2026

Uh oh!

oech3 commented Feb 2, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 2, 2026

Uh oh!

oech3 commented Feb 4, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2026

Uh oh!

oech3 commented Feb 5, 2026

Uh oh!

oech3 commented Feb 5, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

oech3 commented Jan 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq bot commented Jan 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading