2025/04/08

Newest at the top

2025-04-08 03:16:38 +0200 <EvanR> emojelly, to be serious about profiling you have to have all your dependencies built for profiling
2025-04-08 03:13:47 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-04-08 03:12:21 +0200ljdarj1ljdarj
2025-04-08 03:12:21 +0200ljdarj(~Thunderbi@user/ljdarj) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
2025-04-08 03:12:20 +0200xff0x(~xff0x@ai066236.d.east.v6connect.net) (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
2025-04-08 03:08:44 +0200ljdarj1(~Thunderbi@user/ljdarj) ljdarj
2025-04-08 03:06:54 +0200Pixi(~Pixi@user/pixi) Pixi
2025-04-08 03:06:00 +0200Pixi(~Pixi@user/pixi) (Quit: Leaving)
2025-04-08 03:03:04 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2025-04-08 03:02:37 +0200otto_s(~user@p5b044d5e.dip0.t-ipconnect.de)
2025-04-08 03:01:00 +0200otto_s(~user@p5de2f09d.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
2025-04-08 02:59:21 +0200 <emojelly> Also, the first entry below "gettingrun", which is "resume", somehow has 57732070 ticks (which is a looot) but is 0.0 / 0.0 in execution time. I noticed this pattern throughout the profiling report, that often/always the first cost center hierarchically under the large ones have a lot of ticks?
2025-04-08 02:58:25 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-04-08 02:57:17 +0200 <emojelly> Is my suspicion correct, that this time is spent in other modules, that are somehow not built for profiling?
2025-04-08 02:56:54 +0200 <emojelly> So I guess it's really what's getting evaluated within runIdentityT. But why don't I see any cost centers for that?
2025-04-08 02:56:53 +0200user363627(~user@user/user363627) user363627
2025-04-08 02:56:36 +0200user363627(~user@user/user363627) (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
2025-04-08 02:56:31 +0200 <emojelly> Now "run" itself should in my minimal test case just be "runIdentityT", I doubt we can spend all the time (or really any time) in there.
2025-04-08 02:55:44 +0200 <emojelly> in (liftWith (\(!run) -> {-# SCC rewrapping #-}rewrapCo $ \c -> Right $ Left $ Request ({-# SCC pasting #-}(i1 `paste` i2)) ({-# SCC running #-}(({-# SCC gettingrun #-}run) . {-# SCC runcombined #-}nextCombined c)))) >>= ({-# SCC restoring #-}restoreT) . {-# SCC returning #-}return
2025-04-08 02:55:42 +0200 <emojelly> nextCombined c o = combineRe (unwrapEx ({-# SCC runningco1 #-}(nextco1 o))) (unwrapEx ({-# SCC runningco2 #-}(nextco2 o))) c
2025-04-08 02:55:40 +0200 <emojelly> combineEx (Right (Left (Request i1 nextco1))) (Right (Left (Request i2 nextco2))) = let
2025-04-08 02:55:04 +0200 <emojelly> the first one, which I named "gettingrun", here:
2025-04-08 02:54:56 +0200 <emojelly> resume Control.Monad.Coroutine Control/Monad/Coroutine.hs:88:4-9 1803 57732070 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0
2025-04-08 02:54:54 +0200 <emojelly> gettingrun SigTest tests/SigTest.hs:101:175-177 1760 24025 64.3 45.8 81.5 58.5 865788 24019809720
2025-04-08 02:54:52 +0200 <emojelly> I have a question about profiling. So according to +RTS -pa, most of the time is spent in the following cost center:
2025-04-08 02:47:21 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
2025-04-08 02:40:21 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-04-08 02:29:33 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
2025-04-08 02:25:35 +0200acidjnk_new3(~acidjnk@p200300d6e71c4f1839a5a90aae0b2850.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
2025-04-08 02:24:35 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-04-08 02:24:18 +0200ezzieyguywuf(~Unknown@user/ezzieyguywuf) (Quit: Lost terminal)
2025-04-08 02:21:34 +0200j1n37(~j1n37@user/j1n37) j1n37
2025-04-08 02:20:03 +0200j1n37-(~j1n37@user/j1n37) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
2025-04-08 02:16:21 +0200notdabs(~Owner@2600:1700:69cf:9000:20c6:7b0d:8034:a6ce)
2025-04-08 02:14:30 +0200nurupo(~nurupo.ga@user/nurupo) nurupo
2025-04-08 02:13:55 +0200nurupo(~nurupo.ga@user/nurupo) (Quit: nurupo.ga)
2025-04-08 02:13:48 +0200anpad(~pandeyan@user/anpad) anpad
2025-04-08 02:13:33 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2025-04-08 02:12:56 +0200anpad(~pandeyan@user/anpad) (Quit: ZNC 1.8.2 - https://znc.in)
2025-04-08 02:09:42 +0200emojelly(~eselber_p@user/endojelly) endojelly
2025-04-08 02:09:24 +0200emojelly(~eselber_p@user/endojelly) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2025-04-08 02:08:47 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-04-08 02:04:06 +0200jespada(~jespada@r190-133-49-11.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2025-04-08 01:57:54 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2025-04-08 01:53:07 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-04-08 01:46:29 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
2025-04-08 01:46:11 +0200sprotte24(~sprotte24@p200300d16f30f50054794865c50a74ee.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2025-04-08 01:43:28 +0200Tuplanolla(~Tuplanoll@91-159-69-59.elisa-laajakaista.fi) (Quit: Leaving.)
2025-04-08 01:41:54 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-04-08 01:36:38 +0200peterbecich(~Thunderbi@syn-047-229-123-186.res.spectrum.com) (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)