On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 05:50:30PM -0600, Victor Rodriguez wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 7:32 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 06:45:51PM -0600, Victor Rodriguez wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> >> >> Despite the fact that this is not a well formulated question. I wonder >> >> what tests could be a good subset to measure the performance of the >> >> kernel . I have some approaches like phoronix does here : >> >> >> >> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux-41-byt&num=1 >> >> >> >> I am sure postmark/ John the ripper/ Apache are good candidates but I >> >> want to ask the community if there is some specific test that you >> >> recommend >> > >> > It depends on what you want to test, specifically. The "kernel" isn't a >> > very specific thing, what most of those tests test is the speed of the >> > hardware, not specifically the kernel itself. >> > >> > good luck, >> > >> > greg k-h >> >> Thanks for the feedback . You are right they test the speed of the HW >> however I have seen that when there is a change in the kernel for >> network the performance of apache is changed, which make total sense . > > Maybe, maybe not, depending on if "apache" is cpu or hardware bound > (networking hardware has physical limits...) again, you have to be very > sure about exactly what you are wanting to test before using such a test > to try to "validate" anything other than just raw hardware speed. > Agree , you are right > Take a look at the "old" lmbench set of benchmarks for valid things that > a kernel change can affect, it's much different from what you might be > thinking of as a test. > I will do >> I think that LTSI should have kind of a test suite with significant >> test that could help the developer to detect those perf changes. Is >> very common that one as OS developer make a change in one package ( >> important one as the kernel ) and do not check how this affect the >> performance of the OS ( I know is too general , but we might show >> BKM's) > > WHat is "BKM"? > Sorry , too many years at intel :) Best Known Method >> I think this might be a good topic to discuss with the community and >> we could came with a solid recommended test suite in the LTSI project. > > LTSI already has a "test suite" that is uses to test the releases, > what's wrong with that? I'm sure the developers would be glad to add > any additional tests that you want added to it that you find missing and > useful. Do we have a subset of test inside LTSI test suite just for performance ? What i am thinking is that in LTSI suite we could have subset of tests: -> Unit tests -> Functional Tests -> Performance tests So if that could exist would be amazing for a OS development team. Also to give the possibility to have CI natural in the LTSI test suite :) . Imagine that : -> when you have a new commit you can run specific test and you can run the test you want or all the test suite without merging your change -> you could make a new release and then the Performance test be executed and then the graphs show of ( are we better or worst ? ) We in Clear Linux ( as in many other projects ) are working to make this a full CI for the entire OS , not just for Kernel , but would be nice if LTSI system could have that and the kernel team of many companies could use it as a full test suite / CI It might be just a naive idea but I think it would be very helpful As always thanks a lot for the feedback Greg I lear a lot from this :) Best Regards Victor Rodriguez > Also note that the upstream kernel is tested by a huge test suite of > performance tests and static analysis tools for every commit in all > development branches by the wonderful 0-day bot system. That's been > helping prevent regressions for a long time now. > > thanks, > > greg k-h _______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
