|
| 1 | +% Benchmark tests |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +Rust supports benchmark tests, which can test the performance of your |
| 4 | +code. Let's make our `src/lib.rs` look like this (comments elided): |
| 5 | + |
| 6 | +```{rust,ignore} |
| 7 | +#![feature(test)] |
| 8 | +
|
| 9 | +extern crate test; |
| 10 | +
|
| 11 | +pub fn add_two(a: i32) -> i32 { |
| 12 | + a + 2 |
| 13 | +} |
| 14 | +
|
| 15 | +#[cfg(test)] |
| 16 | +mod tests { |
| 17 | + use super::*; |
| 18 | + use test::Bencher; |
| 19 | +
|
| 20 | + #[test] |
| 21 | + fn it_works() { |
| 22 | + assert_eq!(4, add_two(2)); |
| 23 | + } |
| 24 | +
|
| 25 | + #[bench] |
| 26 | + fn bench_add_two(b: &mut Bencher) { |
| 27 | + b.iter(|| add_two(2)); |
| 28 | + } |
| 29 | +} |
| 30 | +``` |
| 31 | + |
| 32 | +Note the `test` feature gate, which enables this unstable feature. |
| 33 | + |
| 34 | +We've imported the `test` crate, which contains our benchmarking support. |
| 35 | +We have a new function as well, with the `bench` attribute. Unlike regular |
| 36 | +tests, which take no arguments, benchmark tests take a `&mut Bencher`. This |
| 37 | +`Bencher` provides an `iter` method, which takes a closure. This closure |
| 38 | +contains the code we'd like to benchmark. |
| 39 | + |
| 40 | +We can run benchmark tests with `cargo bench`: |
| 41 | + |
| 42 | +```bash |
| 43 | +$ cargo bench |
| 44 | + Compiling adder v0.0.1 (file:///home/steve/tmp/adder) |
| 45 | + Running target/release/adder-91b3e234d4ed382a |
| 46 | + |
| 47 | +running 2 tests |
| 48 | +test tests::it_works ... ignored |
| 49 | +test tests::bench_add_two ... bench: 1 ns/iter (+/- 0) |
| 50 | + |
| 51 | +test result: ok. 0 passed; 0 failed; 1 ignored; 1 measured |
| 52 | +``` |
| 53 | + |
| 54 | +Our non-benchmark test was ignored. You may have noticed that `cargo bench` |
| 55 | +takes a bit longer than `cargo test`. This is because Rust runs our benchmark |
| 56 | +a number of times, and then takes the average. Because we're doing so little |
| 57 | +work in this example, we have a `1 ns/iter (+/- 0)`, but this would show |
| 58 | +the variance if there was one. |
| 59 | + |
| 60 | +Advice on writing benchmarks: |
| 61 | + |
| 62 | + |
| 63 | +* Move setup code outside the `iter` loop; only put the part you want to measure inside |
| 64 | +* Make the code do "the same thing" on each iteration; do not accumulate or change state |
| 65 | +* Make the outer function idempotent too; the benchmark runner is likely to run |
| 66 | + it many times |
| 67 | +* Make the inner `iter` loop short and fast so benchmark runs are fast and the |
| 68 | + calibrator can adjust the run-length at fine resolution |
| 69 | +* Make the code in the `iter` loop do something simple, to assist in pinpointing |
| 70 | + performance improvements (or regressions) |
| 71 | + |
| 72 | +## Gotcha: optimizations |
| 73 | + |
| 74 | +There's another tricky part to writing benchmarks: benchmarks compiled with |
| 75 | +optimizations activated can be dramatically changed by the optimizer so that |
| 76 | +the benchmark is no longer benchmarking what one expects. For example, the |
| 77 | +compiler might recognize that some calculation has no external effects and |
| 78 | +remove it entirely. |
| 79 | + |
| 80 | +```{rust,ignore} |
| 81 | +#![feature(test)] |
| 82 | +
|
| 83 | +extern crate test; |
| 84 | +use test::Bencher; |
| 85 | +
|
| 86 | +#[bench] |
| 87 | +fn bench_xor_1000_ints(b: &mut Bencher) { |
| 88 | + b.iter(|| { |
| 89 | + (0..1000).fold(0, |old, new| old ^ new); |
| 90 | + }); |
| 91 | +} |
| 92 | +``` |
| 93 | + |
| 94 | +gives the following results |
| 95 | + |
| 96 | +```text |
| 97 | +running 1 test |
| 98 | +test bench_xor_1000_ints ... bench: 0 ns/iter (+/- 0) |
| 99 | +
|
| 100 | +test result: ok. 0 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored; 1 measured |
| 101 | +``` |
| 102 | + |
| 103 | +The benchmarking runner offers two ways to avoid this. Either, the closure that |
| 104 | +the `iter` method receives can return an arbitrary value which forces the |
| 105 | +optimizer to consider the result used and ensures it cannot remove the |
| 106 | +computation entirely. This could be done for the example above by adjusting the |
| 107 | +`b.iter` call to |
| 108 | + |
| 109 | +```rust |
| 110 | +# struct X; |
| 111 | +# impl X { fn iter<T, F>(&self, _: F) where F: FnMut() -> T {} } let b = X; |
| 112 | +b.iter(|| { |
| 113 | + // note lack of `;` (could also use an explicit `return`). |
| 114 | + (0..1000).fold(0, |old, new| old ^ new) |
| 115 | +}); |
| 116 | +``` |
| 117 | + |
| 118 | +Or, the other option is to call the generic `test::black_box` function, which |
| 119 | +is an opaque "black box" to the optimizer and so forces it to consider any |
| 120 | +argument as used. |
| 121 | + |
| 122 | +```rust |
| 123 | +#![feature(test)] |
| 124 | + |
| 125 | +extern crate test; |
| 126 | + |
| 127 | +# fn main() { |
| 128 | +# struct X; |
| 129 | +# impl X { fn iter<T, F>(&self, _: F) where F: FnMut() -> T {} } let b = X; |
| 130 | +b.iter(|| { |
| 131 | + let n = test::black_box(1000); |
| 132 | + |
| 133 | + (0..n).fold(0, |a, b| a ^ b) |
| 134 | +}) |
| 135 | +# } |
| 136 | +``` |
| 137 | + |
| 138 | +Neither of these read or modify the value, and are very cheap for small values. |
| 139 | +Larger values can be passed indirectly to reduce overhead (e.g. |
| 140 | +`black_box(&huge_struct)`). |
| 141 | + |
| 142 | +Performing either of the above changes gives the following benchmarking results |
| 143 | + |
| 144 | +```text |
| 145 | +running 1 test |
| 146 | +test bench_xor_1000_ints ... bench: 131 ns/iter (+/- 3) |
| 147 | +
|
| 148 | +test result: ok. 0 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored; 1 measured |
| 149 | +``` |
| 150 | + |
| 151 | +However, the optimizer can still modify a testcase in an undesirable manner |
| 152 | +even when using either of the above. |
0 commit comments