Hi Shuah and Ilpo, On 4/24/2024 6:49 AM, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 4/8/24 10:32, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> This series does a number of cleanups into resctrl_val() and >> generalizes it by removing test name specific handling from the >> function. >> >> One of the changes improves MBA/MBM measurement by narrowing down the >> period the resctrl FS derived memory bandwidth numbers are measured >> over. My feel is it didn't cause noticeable difference into the numbers >> because they're generally good anyway except for the small number of >> outliers. To see the impact on outliers, I'd need to setup a test to >> run large number of replications and do a statistical analysis, which >> I've not spent my time on. Even without the statistical analysis, the >> new way to measure seems obviously better and makes sense even if I >> cannot see a major improvement with the setup I'm using. >> >> This series has some conflicts with SNC series from Maciej (Maciej has >> privately agreed to base his series on top of this series) and also >> with the MBA/MBM series from Babu. >> >> -- >> i. >> >> v3: >> - Rename init functions to <testname>_init() >> - Replace for loops with READ+WRITE statements for clarity >> - Don't drop Return: entry from perf_open_imc_mem_bw() func comment >> - New patch: Fix closing of IMC fds in case of error >> - New patch: Make "bandwidth" consistent in comments & prints >> - New patch: Simplify mem bandwidth file code >> - Remove wrong comment >> - Changed grp_name check to return -1 on fail (internal sanity check) >> > > I can apply these for Linux 6.10-rc1 once I get an Ack from Reinette. > Apologies for the delay in reviewing this. I've now provided feedback for consideration. Reinette
