Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

(feature): Adding general benchmark to Poseidon. #615

Closed
wants to merge 12 commits into from

Conversation

protocolwhisper
Copy link
Contributor

Benchmarking Poseidon hash function

Description

Benchmark for the Poseidon implementation

Type of change

  • [ x] New feature

Checklist

  • [ x] Benchmarks added/run

@protocolwhisper protocolwhisper requested review from schouhy, ajgara and a team as code owners October 20, 2023 05:05
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Oct 20, 2023

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (1530d4b) 96.17% compared to head (777ace9) 96.17%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #615   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.17%   96.17%           
=======================================
  Files         132      132           
  Lines       30013    30013           
=======================================
  Hits        28866    28866           
  Misses       1147     1147           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@mdvillagra
Copy link
Contributor

@MauroToscano maybe we can also add it to these benchmarks https://github.com/mdvillagra/poseidon-benchmarks

@protocolwhisper protocolwhisper changed the title feature): Adding general benchmark to Poseidon. (feature): Adding general benchmark to Poseidon. Oct 23, 2023
@MauroToscano
Copy link
Collaborator

Tests and benchmarks shouldn't be coupled. If someone changes a test, benchmarks will change. They can share some common helper functions if needed, but they have to be different

@protocolwhisper
Copy link
Contributor Author

Tests and benchmarks shouldn't be coupled. If someone changes a test, benchmarks will change. They can share some common helper functions if needed, but they have to be different

I just updated it and ran the benchmark with the bls12381 prime field.

@protocolwhisper
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm closing this PR cause this is currently addressed in this PR: #703

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants