Performance Tracker project update

[Kris Kennaway]

Erik Cederstrand wrote:
> Ivan Voras wrote:
>>
>> I have a suggestion to make the graphs more readable: if a long period 
>> was chosen by the user (e.g. > 100 days / plot points), don't plot 
>> points and error bars, plot a simple line through the points. Also, 
>> set all date strings on the X-axis to empty strings except for the 
>> dates on 1/10ths of the interval.
> 
> Noted. Thanks.

Actually the error bars are quite important to see what is going on. 
Some of the metrics are very (too) noisy and if you only look at the 
data points they sometimes appear to have a signal when they don't. 
Ultimately that just means more data points should be taken per run for 
those metrics, but the error bars are the signal for this.

>> Did you remove WITNESS,INVARIANTS and malloc debugging for the 
>> benchmarks?
> 
> The kernel configuration file has:
> include GENERIC
> PERFMON    nomakeoptions    DEBUG
> PERFMON    nooptions    INVARIANTS
> PERFMON    nooptions    GDB
> PERFMON    nooptions    DDB
> PERFMON    nooptions    KDB
> PERFMON    nooptions    WITNESS
> PERFMON    nooptions    WITNESS_SKIPSPIN
> PERFMON    nooptions    INVARIANT_SUPPORT
> 
> I also ship the images with a GENERIC kernel in case debugging is needed.
> 
> I haven't touched malloc.conf but realize that I should. What's the 
> official recommendation on malloc settings?

For benchmarking you should enable MALLOC_PRODUCTION in 
src/lib/libc/stdlib/malloc.c.  Anyway, for now I am not worried about 
the particular benchmarks you are running, because they are just 
demonstrators for the framework and we can easily go back and add more 
in later on.

Kris