feat(bench): add release performance comparison workflow - #143
Merged
Conversation
- Extend vs_linalg with LDLT/Cholesky benchmark rows and shared deterministic inputs. - Add smoke coverage that checks la-stack, nalgebra, and faer agree on benchmark inputs. - Expand bench-compare to support latest-vs-last reports, suite/scope selection, peer baseline context, and clearer malformed Criterion diagnostics. - Document the benchmark methodology, release baseline workflow, roadmap direction, and contributor guidance.
Contributor
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughAdds deterministic benchmark helpers and bench-gating tests, refactors vs_linalg benches toward SPD (LDLT/Cholesky) flows, and extends scripts/bench_compare to be suite/scope-aware with peer-context reporting; updates just recipes and benchmarking/release/contributing docs. ChangesBenchmark Infrastructure and Suite Comparison
Estimated code review effort🎯 4 (Complex) | ⏱️ ~60 minutes Possibly related issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #143 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 99.61% 99.61% =======================================
Files 5 5 Lines 2846 2846 =======================================
Hits 2835 2835 Misses 11 11
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
acgetchell
enabled auto-merge
June 4, 2026 18:41
Use a literal regex pattern for the malformed Criterion JSON diagnostic so Windows paths with backslashes do not break pytest's match expression.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@scripts/bench_compare.py`:
- Around line 721-726: The hint generator _save_baseline_hint currently drops
the user's requested scope; modify _save_baseline_hint to accept a scope
argument (e.g., def _save_baseline_hint(suite: str, baseline: str, scope: str)
-> str) and include the scope flag in the returned command (append `--scope
{scope}` or only when scope is not the default) for all branches (the "exact",
"vs_linalg" and default cases) so the suggested `bench-save-baseline` command
preserves the original scope; apply the same change to the other similar helper
at the other occurrence mentioned (around the 749-751 block).
In `@scripts/tests/test_bench_compare.py`:
- Around line 153-158: The regex used in the pytest.raises matcher in
test_read_estimate_malformed_json_names_file is vulnerable because the Path
string {est} may contain regex metacharacters; update the test to escape the
path when building the match (e.g. use re.escape(str(est)) or escape only the
{est} portion) so the match is literal, and add the necessary import for re;
keep the assertion calling bench_compare._read_estimate unchanged.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 5c930f6f-b3b5-407c-8c47-3e7e31324f1b
📒 Files selected for processing (12)
CONTRIBUTING.mdREADME.mdbenches/common/vs_linalg.rsbenches/vs_linalg.rsdocs/BENCHMARKING.mddocs/RELEASING.mddocs/roadmap.mdjustfilescripts/README.mdscripts/bench_compare.pyscripts/tests/test_bench_compare.pytests/vs_linalg_inputs.rs
Comment on lines
+721
to
+726
| def _save_baseline_hint(suite: str, baseline: str) -> str: | ||
| if suite == "exact": | ||
| return f"just bench-save-baseline {baseline} exact" | ||
| if suite == "vs_linalg": | ||
| return f"just bench-save-baseline {baseline} vs_linalg" | ||
| return f"just bench-save-baseline {baseline}" |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Preserve scope in the baseline recovery hint.
When the user runs with --scope all-benches, this fallback still suggests the default bench-save-baseline flow. That drops the requested scope and can leave the peer baseline rows missing on the rerun.
Also applies to: 749-751
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In `@scripts/bench_compare.py` around lines 721 - 726, The hint generator
_save_baseline_hint currently drops the user's requested scope; modify
_save_baseline_hint to accept a scope argument (e.g., def
_save_baseline_hint(suite: str, baseline: str, scope: str) -> str) and include
the scope flag in the returned command (append `--scope {scope}` or only when
scope is not the default) for all branches (the "exact", "vs_linalg" and default
cases) so the suggested `bench-save-baseline` command preserves the original
scope; apply the same change to the other similar helper at the other occurrence
mentioned (around the 749-751 block).
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
This was referenced Jun 4, 2026
This was referenced Jul 31, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary by CodeRabbit
Documentation
Tests
Chores / Tooling