[MAGEEC] [BEEBS] So what _do_ the E's stand for...

George Field george.field at bristol.ac.uk
Fri Aug 1 22:21:27 BST 2014

Hi all,

I'm also in favour of "Bristol/Embecosm Embedded Benchmark Suite".


On 1 August 2014 21:51, Simon Cook <simon.cook at embecosm.com> wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
> (I may have this history slightly wrong, but this is the order of events I
> recall.)
> I believe originally it was Bristol Energy Efficiency Benchmark Suite
> (note README.md still refers to this), but then to add Embecosm to the
> name, and to avoid having BEEEBS as the name morphed into Bristol/Embecosm
> Energy Efficiency Benchmark Suite, where the B stands for both Bristol and
> Embecosm.
> Over time, we wanted to emphasise Embedded as the target, so Efficiency
> was dropped in favour of Embedded (and the two Es were swapped). I think
> Energy may have been dropped at some point, as whilst the original
> benchmark suite was used for energy, we didn't want it to be useful
> exclusively for this purpose, so we end up with Bristol/Embecosm Embedded
> Benchmark Suite.
> For consistency, I would choose "Bristol/Embecosm Embedded Benchmark
> Suite", as in my view that's what describes it best. It's a benchmark suite
> targetting embedded systems, energy is one way we're using it, but it's not
> the only way it can be used. I realise that's different to the name chosen
> in the meeting, but thats just my view on the name.
> Of course, if the consensus is for "Bristol/Embecosm Energy Benchmark
> Suite", we should go for that. Any other thoughts anyone?
> Thanks,
> Simon
> On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 8:17 PM, Andrew Burgess <
> andrew.burgess at embecosm.com> wrote:
>> I was going to standardise the expanded name used throughout the BEEBS
>> code and just wanted to double check that there's agreement on what
>> the actual name should be.
>> Currently on the wiki here for example:
>>   http://mageec.org/2014/06/20/introducing-beebs-benchmarking-for-energy/
>> We go with "Bristol/Embecosm Embedded Energy Benchmark Suite", which
>> seems to have too many E's.
>> In the code we currently have:
>>       1 Bristol/Embecosm Benchmark Suite
>>       4 Bristol/Embecosm Embedded Benchmark Suite
>>     100 Bristol/Embecosm Embedded Energy Benchmark Suite
>>     277 Bristol/Embecosm Energy Efficiency Benchmark
>>       2 Bristol Energy Efficiency Benchmark Suite
>> In the last meeting, according to the notes:
>>      http://mageec.org/wiki/Meeting_21_July_2014
>> we agreed on "Bristol/Embecosm Energy Benchmark Suite"
>> but I thought we'd agreed "Bristol/Embecosm Embedded Benchmark Suite".
>> Would anyone like to pick one?  If I don't hear anything else I'll go
>> with "Bristol/Embecosm Energy Benchmark Suite" as that's what the
>> minutes say we agreed on.
>> Thanks,
>> Andrew
>> _______________________________________________
>> mageec mailing list
>> mageec at mageec.org
>> http://mageec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mageec
> _______________________________________________
> mageec mailing list
> mageec at mageec.org
> http://mageec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mageec
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mageec.org/pipermail/mageec/attachments/20140801/479f3667/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the mageec mailing list