Skip to content

wip gpu scan

d1da424
Select commit
Loading
Failed to load commit list.
Merged

feat[scan]: gpu scan #6199

wip gpu scan
d1da424
Select commit
Loading
Failed to load commit list.
CodSpeed HQ / CodSpeed Performance Analysis failed Jan 29, 2026

Performance Regression: -29.9%

⚠️ Unknown Walltime execution environment detected

Using the Walltime instrument on standard Hosted Runners will lead to inconsistent data.

For the most accurate results, we recommend using CodSpeed Macro Runners: bare-metal machines fine-tuned for performance measurement consistency.

⚡ 7 improved benchmarks
❌ 11 regressed benchmarks
✅ 1143 untouched benchmarks
🆕 18 new benchmarks
⏩ 1323 skipped benchmarks1

⚠️ Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Performance Changes

Mode Benchmark BASE HEAD Efficiency
🆕 WallTime 10M_90pct[10000000] N/A 200.7 µs N/A
🆕 WallTime 1M_10pct[100000] N/A 21.8 µs N/A
🆕 WallTime 1M_10pct[100000] N/A 46.7 µs N/A
🆕 WallTime 1M_90pct[1000000] N/A 29.2 µs N/A
🆕 WallTime 10M_90pct[10000000] N/A 367.1 µs N/A
WallTime u32_values_u8_codes[10M] 133.7 µs 170.9 µs -21.75%
🆕 WallTime 1M_50pct[500000] N/A 22.8 µs N/A
🆕 WallTime 10M_10pct[1000000] N/A 222.9 µs N/A
🆕 WallTime 10M_10pct[1000000] N/A 218.7 µs N/A
🆕 WallTime 10M_90pct[10000000] N/A 368.3 µs N/A
🆕 WallTime 10M_50pct[5000000] N/A 157.9 µs N/A
🆕 WallTime 1M_10pct[100000] N/A 47.3 µs N/A
🆕 WallTime 10M_50pct[5000000] N/A 282.8 µs N/A
🆕 WallTime 10M_10pct[1000000] N/A 137 µs N/A
🆕 WallTime 1M_90pct[1000000] N/A 56.1 µs N/A
🆕 WallTime 10M_50pct[5000000] N/A 280.4 µs N/A
🆕 WallTime 1M_50pct[500000] N/A 52 µs N/A
🆕 WallTime 1M_90pct[1000000] N/A 58.6 µs N/A
🆕 WallTime 1M_50pct[500000] N/A 51.6 µs N/A
Simulation canonical_into_non_nullable[(10000, 1, 0.1)] 48 µs 57.2 µs -16.06%
... ... ... ... ... ...

ℹ️ Only the first 20 benchmarks are displayed. Go to the app to view all benchmarks.


Comparing ji/gpu-scan-2 (d1da424) with develop (68130ce)2

Open in CodSpeed

Footnotes

  1. 1323 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports.

  2. No successful run was found on develop (1e401b2) during the generation of this report, so 68130ce was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report.