Skip to content

Conversation

@IgorSwat
Copy link
Contributor

@IgorSwat IgorSwat commented Nov 3, 2025

Description

Introduces a breaking change?

  • Yes
  • No

Type of change

  • Bug fix (change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (change which adds functionality)
  • Documentation update (improves or adds clarity to existing documentation)
  • Other (chores, tests, code style improvements etc.)

Tested on

  • iOS
  • Android

Testing instructions

Screenshots

Related issues

Checklist

  • I have performed a self-review of my code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly
  • My changes generate no new warnings

Additional notes

@IgorSwat IgorSwat requested a review from jakmro November 3, 2025 07:24
@IgorSwat IgorSwat changed the title @is/update benchmarks chore: Update non-LLM benchmarks post C++ port Nov 3, 2025
@IgorSwat IgorSwat force-pushed the @is/update-benchmarks branch from f0e83ff to bbd7f53 Compare November 17, 2025 09:55
@msluszniak msluszniak removed the request for review from jakmro November 28, 2025 11:20
@msluszniak
Copy link
Member

Are we waiting for something on this PR @IgorSwat ?

@IgorSwat
Copy link
Contributor Author

IgorSwat commented Dec 1, 2025

Are we waiting for something on this PR @IgorSwat ?

Technically there is only a review needed.
On the other hand, we already know that these benchmarks are outdated, at least for the computer vision models - since OpenCV threadpool fix found by @NorbertKlockiewicz significantly improves inference time.

IgorSwat and others added 7 commits December 1, 2025 11:03
## Description

The Whisper model export now takes in a plain waveform instead of
pre-computed STFT. This PR aims to change the current API to accept
waveforms instead. Before merging this, make sure to re-export all the
existing Whisper models with the new export script.

### Introduces a breaking change?

- [ ] Yes
- [x] No

### Type of change

- [ ] Bug fix (change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Documentation update (improves or adds clarity to existing
documentation)
- [ ] Other (chores, tests, code style improvements etc.)

### Tested on

- [x] iOS
- [x] Android

### Testing instructions

<!-- Provide step-by-step instructions on how to test your changes.
Include setup details if necessary. -->

### Screenshots

<!-- Add screenshots here, if applicable -->

### Related issues

<!-- Link related issues here using #issue-number -->

### Checklist

- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have updated the documentation accordingly
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings

### Additional notes

<!-- Include any additional information, assumptions, or context that
reviewers might need to understand this PR. -->

---------

Co-authored-by: chmjkb <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jakub Chmura <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: IgorSwat <[email protected]>
## Description

Expo 54 introduces a new FileSystem API, deprecating the ones used in
our codebase. The old APIs can still be accessed under
`expo-file-system/legacy`. This is a temporary fix to work with old Expo
versions.

### Introduces a breaking change?

- [ ] Yes
- [x] No

### Type of change

- [x] Bug fix (change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Documentation update (improves or adds clarity to existing
documentation)
- [ ] Other (chores, tests, code style improvements etc.)

### Tested on

- [x] iOS
- [x] Android

### Testing instructions

<!-- Provide step-by-step instructions on how to test your changes.
Include setup details if necessary. -->

### Screenshots

<!-- Add screenshots here, if applicable -->

### Related issues

<!-- Link related issues here using #issue-number -->

### Checklist

- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have updated the documentation accordingly
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings

### Additional notes

<!-- Include any additional information, assumptions, or context that
reviewers might need to understand this PR. -->
## Description

We observed activity on all CPU cores despite manually configuring the
thread pool. OpenCV's internal threading was activating all available
cores, overriding our optimized thread configuration and resulting in
worse performance.

### Introduces a breaking change?

- [ ] Yes
- [x] No

### Type of change

- [x] Bug fix (change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Documentation update (improves or adds clarity to existing
documentation)
- [ ] Other (chores, tests, code style improvements etc.)

### Tested on

- [x] iOS
- [x] Android

### Testing instructions

<!-- Provide step-by-step instructions on how to test your changes.
Include setup details if necessary. -->

### Screenshots

<!-- Add screenshots here, if applicable -->

### Related issues

<!-- Link related issues here using #issue-number -->

### Checklist

- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have updated the documentation accordingly
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings

### Additional notes

<!-- Include any additional information, assumptions, or context that
reviewers might need to understand this PR. -->
## Description

<!-- Provide a concise and descriptive summary of the changes
implemented in this PR. -->

### Introduces a breaking change?

- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No

### Type of change

- [ ] Bug fix (change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Documentation update (improves or adds clarity to existing
documentation)
- [ ] Other (chores, tests, code style improvements etc.)

### Tested on

- [ ] iOS
- [ ] Android

### Testing instructions

<!-- Provide step-by-step instructions on how to test your changes.
Include setup details if necessary. -->

### Screenshots

<!-- Add screenshots here, if applicable -->

### Related issues

<!-- Link related issues here using #issue-number -->

### Checklist

- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have updated the documentation accordingly
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings

### Additional notes

<!-- Include any additional information, assumptions, or context that
reviewers might need to understand this PR. -->
@IgorSwat IgorSwat requested a review from chmjkb December 5, 2025 07:30
@chmjkb chmjkb merged commit bb27ec9 into main Dec 8, 2025
5 checks passed
@chmjkb chmjkb deleted the @is/update-benchmarks branch December 8, 2025 08:48
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.

5 participants