> On 10 Jul 2015, at 09:47 , Cory Pruce <corypruce@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Signed PGP part > > > > > Well, you could test my latest branches for #14175: > > Hey Tim, I got the branch of chutney and tor and made sure that the > commands you run in the comments of the issue exist. What do you think > would be a good way to start testing? Begin with a static analysis of > the code? If you can read Python and shell script, then checking I haven't made any obvious coding errors in my changes would help. But that might require becoming familiar with the codebase - which may take some effort. The diffs are here, or you can use git diff: https://github.com/teor2345/chutney/compare/feature14175-chutney-performance-v2 https://github.com/teor2345/tor/compare/feature14175-chutney-performance-v2 Also, I was only using Python 2, so I might have accidentally introduced some incompatibilities with Python 3. > Verify that the bandwidth is correct? Since it's the localhost, CPU-limited, massively-parallel bandwidth, there's no "correct" value. I'm not even sure what sane values are, but we'll get an idea once people start competing for the biggest numbers. > Let me know what you > think is important/feasible. Does it run? When you make performance improvements, does the bandwidth increase? (Or, far more easily: when you deliberately slow down the code, does the bandwidth tank?) Tim Tim Wilson-Brown (teor) teor2345 at gmail dot com pgp ABFED1AC https://gist.github.com/teor2345/d033b8ce0a99adbc89c5 teor at blah dot im OTR D5BE4EC2 255D7585 F3874930 DB130265 7C9EBBC7
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev