benchmarks: prepare args outside benchmark

[xtqqczze]

Currently, we construct uucore::Args within the measured section of benchmarks. That adds allocation and conversion overhead and will skew the results.

Not all benchmarks are converted yet, but perhaps we can take this as a first step.

[github-actions]

GNU testsuite comparison:

GNU test failed: tests/tail/retry. tests/tail/retry is passing on 'main'. Maybe you have to rebase?

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will improve performance by ×31

⚡ 7 improved benchmarks
✅ 291 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 48 skipped benchmarks¹

Performance Changes

	Mode	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Efficiency
⚡	Memory	du_deep_tree[(100, 3)]	3,209.6 KB	104.5 KB	×31
⚡	Simulation	unexpand_large_file[10]	302.2 ms	270.8 ms	+11.63%
⚡	Simulation	unexpand_many_lines[100000]	144.3 ms	129.2 ms	+11.62%
⚡	Simulation	cp_large_file[16]	278.2 µs	260.5 µs	+6.77%
⚡	Simulation	du_wide_tree[(5000, 500)]	9.1 ms	8 ms	+14.05%
⚡	Simulation	du_all_wide_tree[(5000, 500)]	16.2 ms	15.1 ms	+7.62%
⚡	Simulation	du_deep_tree[(100, 3)]	1,098.1 µs	950.3 µs	+15.55%

---

_{Comparing xtqqczze:get_benchmark_args (a2788c0) with main (995c9e0)}

Footnotes

1. 48 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. ↩

[xtqqczze]

@sylvestre Please could you confirm whether these changes are viable to apply in full?

[sylvestre]

i guess ? :)

[xtqqczze]

Need to refactor to handle the following case:

coreutils/src/uu/cp/benches/cp_bench.rs

Lines 27 to 33 in 456252f

	bencher.bench(|| {
	fs_utils::remove_path(&dest);
	let mut full_args = Vec::with_capacity(args.len() + 2);
	full_args.extend_from_slice(args);
	full_args.push(source_str);
	full_args.push(dest_str);

[oech3]

Should we wait working about #10486 until your PR was merged?
Any chance for splitting PR?

[github-actions]

GNU testsuite comparison:

GNU test failed: tests/pr/bounded-memory. tests/pr/bounded-memory is passing on 'main'. Maybe you have to rebase?

[oech3]

is this able to merge?

[xtqqczze]

is this able to merge?

I couldn't work out how to handle all the cases, such as #10388 (comment)

[oech3]

How about splitting this PR?

[github-actions]

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skip an intermittent issue tests/tty/tty-eof (fails in this run but passes in the 'main' branch)
Note: The gnu test tests/rm/many-dir-entries-vs-OOM is now being skipped but was previously passing.
Congrats! The gnu test tests/cp/link-heap is now passing!
Congrats! The gnu test tests/cut/cut-huge-range is now passing!
Note: The gnu test tests/env/env-signal-handler was skipped on 'main' but is now failing.

[oech3]

Any progress about this?

[github-actions]

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skip an intermittent issue tests/pr/bounded-memory (fails in this run but passes in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/cut/bounded-memory (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/date/resolution (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)

[github-actions]

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skip an intermittent issue tests/date/date-locale-hour (fails in this run but passes in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/cut/bounded-memory (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/date/resolution (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)

[github-actions]

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skip an intermittent issue tests/pr/bounded-memory (fails in this run but passes in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/cut/bounded-memory (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/date/resolution (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/tty/tty-eof (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Note: The gnu test tests/csplit/csplit-heap is now being skipped but was previously passing.

[github-actions]

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skipping an intermittent issue tests/tail/follow-name (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Note: The gnu test tests/printf/printf-surprise is now being skipped but was previously passing.
Congrats! The gnu test tests/rm/many-dir-entries-vs-OOM is now passing!
Congrats! The gnu test tests/tail/pipe-f is now passing!

[xtqqczze]

Any progress about this?

Finally, I have clean benchmark results

[github-actions]

GNU testsuite comparison:

GNU test failed: tests/tail/pid-pipe. tests/tail/pid-pipe is passing on 'main'. Maybe you have to rebase?
Skip an intermittent issue tests/tail/inotify-dir-recreate (fails in this run but passes in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/tty/tty-eof (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Note: The gnu test tests/basenc/bounded-memory is now being skipped but was previously passing.
Note: The gnu test tests/tail/tail-n0f is now being skipped but was previously passing.
Congrats! The gnu test tests/rm/many-dir-entries-vs-OOM is now passing!
Congrats! The gnu test tests/tail/pipe-f is now passing!