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

[IGNORE] Performance test of Lagrange and ConvertValues PRs #1419

Conversation

akoshelev
Copy link
Collaborator

#1409 and #1411 together

akoshelev and others added 6 commits November 6, 2024 16:50
There is really no reason for taking an iterator, just makes things worse for the compiler
rustc didn't optimize the `eval` function and ended up doing
131072*32*992 loop iteration per Lagrange compute.

For some unknown reason to me, optimizer works only if we operate
on integers, not on fields. Maybe modulo reduction is to blame
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 8, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 98.38710% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 93.22%. Comparing base (2c5cbfe) to head (8d2c5f7).
Report is 27 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...rc/protocol/ipa_prf/malicious_security/lagrange.rs 88.23% 2 Missing ⚠️
ipa-core/src/protocol/context/dzkp_field.rs 99.40% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1419   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.21%   93.22%           
=======================================
  Files         225      225           
  Lines       38604    38644   +40     
=======================================
+ Hits        35986    36027   +41     
+ Misses       2618     2617    -1     

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

@akoshelev
Copy link
Collaborator Author

3.5hrs vs 4hrs before that: https://draft-mpc.vercel.app/query/view/plane-arbor2024-11-08T1740

@akoshelev akoshelev closed this Nov 12, 2024
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.

2 participants