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

ci: Add comparative GPU benchmarks on merge_group #238

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 9, 2024

Conversation

samuelburnham
Copy link
Member

@samuelburnham samuelburnham commented Jan 5, 2024

GPU benchmarks for PR regression testing

Proposed criterion-table output:

Benchmarks

Table of Contents

Benchmark Results

RecursiveSNARK

ref=ae521be709871f94a622c85b0e5d6e8f776be144 ref=ace6724dc77667506dbcd1122b9851bd6edb25d2
Prove-StepCircuitSize-0 29.28 ms (✅ 1.00x) 28.71 ms (✅ 1.02x faster)
Verify-StepCircuitSize-0 19.48 ms (✅ 1.00x) 19.10 ms (✅ 1.02x faster)
Prove-StepCircuitSize-6559 35.57 ms (✅ 1.00x) 35.27 ms (✅ 1.01x faster)
Verify-StepCircuitSize-6559 23.84 ms (✅ 1.00x) 23.89 ms (✅ 1.00x slower)

Made with criterion-table

Design notes

For the other benchmarks which have more than one group, they would each appear in their own table (e.g. CompressedSNARK and CompressedSNARK-Commitments). This layout will be shown as well when implemented.

Some other display options:

  • Split each StepCircuitSize into its own group, which is the existing behavior. This would proliferate the number of benchmark tables to a large degree if we are displaying four different sets of benchmarks in one .md file
  • Split the Prove and Verify benchmarks into their own table or group them together. This would require some finagling since the benchmarks are currently ordered sequentially in the order they are run.

Future work

Helps #243

samuelburnham pushed a commit to samuelburnham/arecibo that referenced this pull request Jan 5, 2024
* Digest simplifications (argumentcomputer#238)

* remove unused digest computations

* avoid a verifier having to recompute a digest

* update crate version

Restore digest computation and fix API inconsistency (argumentcomputer#242)

* Revert "Digest simplifications (argumentcomputer#238)"

This reverts commit 71ecb66.

* upgrade neptune

* make the public interface uniform wrt refs vs. copies

* simplify prove_step

* refactor: Adapt supernova RecursiveSNARK to Nova API changes

- Updated `RecursiveSNARK` struct in `supernova/mod.rs` to include `z0_primary` and `z0_secondary` fields, simplifying method parameters.
- Refactored `prove_step` method in `RecursiveSNARK` struct to leverage the new instance variables, `z0_primary` and `z0_secondary`,
- Replaced all usages of `z0_primary` and `z0_secondary` in function calls with their respective instance variables.

---------

Co-authored-by: Srinath Setty <srinath@microsoft.com>
@samuelburnham samuelburnham changed the title ci: Add comparative benchmarks on merge_group (WIP) ci: Add comparative GPU benchmarks on merge_group Jan 8, 2024
Copy link
Member

@huitseeker huitseeker left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agreed, this looks like a lot of progress, let's merge and iron out the kinks.

@samuelburnham samuelburnham added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 9, 2024
Merged via the queue into argumentcomputer:dev with commit 85c04b3 Jan 9, 2024
10 checks passed
@samuelburnham samuelburnham deleted the gpu-bench branch January 9, 2024 01:21
huitseeker pushed a commit to huitseeker/arecibo that referenced this pull request Jan 14, 2024
* remove unused digest computations

* avoid a verifier having to recompute a digest

* update crate version
huitseeker pushed a commit to huitseeker/arecibo that referenced this pull request Jan 14, 2024
…r#242)

* Revert "Digest simplifications (argumentcomputer#238)"

This reverts commit 71ecb66.

* upgrade neptune

* make the public interface uniform wrt refs vs. copies

* simplify prove_step
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