Hi John Kacur, Thanks for your time and explaining it. please see my inline comments. >-----Original Message----- >From: John Kacur <jkacur@xxxxxxxxxx> >Sent: 24 September 2021 01:01 >To: pyla venkata(ＴＳＩＰ) <Venkata.Pyla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >Cc: agrawal punit(アグラワル プニト □ＳＷＣ◯ＡＣＴ) ><punit1.agrawal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; sangorrin daniel(サンゴリン ダニエル □ＳＷＣ◯ >ＡＣＴ) <daniel.sangorrin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; dinesh kumar(ＴＳＩＰ) ><dinesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-rt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >Subject: Re: [PATCH] rteval: kcompile.py: Relax the requirement for kernel >tarball filename > > > >On Wed, 22 Sep 2021, venkata.pyla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> From: venkata pyla <venkata.pyla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> The kcompile module includes kernel version when looking for tarballs >> or source folders. This necessitates periodically bumping the >> kernel_prefix but also requires the user to provide particular version >> of the kernel sources when using this workload. As the intent is to >> generate a compile workload the source version used shouldn't matter. >> >> To make life easier both for users and developers, relax the >> requirement for specific version of kernel sources when using >> kcompile. >> >> Signed-off-by: venkata pyla <venkata.pyla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> rteval/modules/loads/kcompile.py | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/rteval/modules/loads/kcompile.py >> b/rteval/modules/loads/kcompile.py >> index 8d08a3d..be40a62 100644 >> --- a/rteval/modules/loads/kcompile.py >> +++ b/rteval/modules/loads/kcompile.py >> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ from rteval.Log import Log from rteval.misc import >> expand_cpulist, compress_cpulist from rteval.systopology import >> SysTopology >> >> -kernel_prefix = "linux-5.13" >> +kernel_prefix = "linux" >> >> class KBuildJob: >> '''Class to manage a build job bound to a particular node''' >> -- >> 2.20.1 >> >> >> > >It shouldn't be onerous for a developer to grab the right version of the kernel >from kernel.org and save it in loadsource IIUC, my intention also same to avoid the hardening the kernel version in the source And let users pick the version they want. But also, I agree with your point for the comparison purpose, the loads should also be same. This needs more discussion and specific to users points of view. > >As for users, they are probably getting rteval from a distribution. >In Fedora and rhel we split it out into two packages. >rteval and rteval-loads. rteval-loads has the correct kernel version. We are downloading the rteval source manually and so the load sources as well. When I use different kernel version then I need to change the rteval source as well which I felt little uncomfortable and so I made this change. > >The idea behind this is that rteval changes more often than the version of the >kernel we compile, so the user doesn't have to download a new kernel >everytime they download a new version of rteval. > >You make a good point though that the purpose is to provide a load. >We have had some discussions in the past about whether making sure everyone >is using the same load so that we have apples to apples comparisons is >necessary or not. I might revisit this in the future with some innovations to >kcompile, but for now this is a NAK. I agree. > >Thank You > >John
