Fix: Energy reporting should report energy not time #5768
Merged
Conversation
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
6a5ecbf to
2bdbafa
Compare
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #5768 +/- ##
=============================================
+ Coverage 86.568% 86.703% +0.135%
=============================================
Files 423 423
Lines 36310 36333 +23
Branches 15473 17103 +1630
=============================================
+ Hits 31433 31502 +69
+ Misses 4837 4550 -287
- Partials 40 281 +241
... and 49 files with indirect coverage changes Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
|
indragiek
approved these changes
Jul 31, 2025
philipphofmann
approved these changes
Jul 31, 2025
Performance metrics 🚀
|
| Revision | Plain | With Sentry | Diff |
|---|---|---|---|
| bce9765 | 1229.42 ms | 1243.49 ms | 14.07 ms |
| 8ad303c | 1220.02 ms | 1231.79 ms | 11.77 ms |
| e64d3d4 | 1241.90 ms | 1260.10 ms | 18.20 ms |
| 42cfd79 | 1222.13 ms | 1244.23 ms | 22.10 ms |
| 9e0030e | 1222.78 ms | 1242.23 ms | 19.45 ms |
| 5aa3ce5 | 1222.78 ms | 1245.39 ms | 22.61 ms |
| f92cfa9 | 1217.94 ms | 1240.06 ms | 22.12 ms |
| 63ac649 | 1192.10 ms | 1216.78 ms | 24.68 ms |
| efab7d3 | 1219.98 ms | 1252.12 ms | 32.14 ms |
| d3f650a | 1225.45 ms | 1241.86 ms | 16.41 ms |
App size
| Revision | Plain | With Sentry | Diff |
|---|---|---|---|
| bce9765 | 23.74 KiB | 874.06 KiB | 850.32 KiB |
| 8ad303c | 23.75 KiB | 879.24 KiB | 855.49 KiB |
| e64d3d4 | 23.75 KiB | 855.37 KiB | 831.62 KiB |
| 42cfd79 | 23.75 KiB | 880.20 KiB | 856.45 KiB |
| 9e0030e | 23.75 KiB | 893.72 KiB | 869.97 KiB |
| 5aa3ce5 | 23.75 KiB | 904.54 KiB | 880.79 KiB |
| f92cfa9 | 23.75 KiB | 855.38 KiB | 831.63 KiB |
| 63ac649 | 23.75 KiB | 855.38 KiB | 831.63 KiB |
| efab7d3 | 23.75 KiB | 912.78 KiB | 889.03 KiB |
| d3f650a | 23.75 KiB | 902.48 KiB | 878.73 KiB |
ebd0fca to
26e51b1
Compare
26e51b1 to
a61aad4
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
The data being reported here was CPU time, not energy (in joules) despite the API request claiming it was reporting joules. This led to invalid data being displayed on the frontend, the UI would say it was graphing watts, but it wasn't actually. You could see this by writing CPU intensive code (I used a simd operation) on a userInitiated queue and comparing it to the same operation on a background queue. Here's the result from my test app before this change on a userInitiatedQueue:
and on a background queue:
The shape is the same, and neither show reasonable numbers for watts (< 0.1W). The shape is the same because about the same amount of CPU time is used, one was just expected to draw more power.
With this fix the graph looks much better and you can clearly see the difference that a userInitiated and background queue make on energy consumption:
