linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] Adding general performance benchmarking subsystem to perf.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:53:35 +0900 (JST)
From:	Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@....info.waseda.ac.jp>
To:	mingo@...e.hu
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
	tglx@...utronix.de, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, efault@....de,
	acme@...hat.com, fweisbec@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] Adding general performance benchmarking
 subsystem to perf.

From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] Adding general performance benchmarking subsystem to perf.
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 08:46:48 +0100

> 
> * Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@....info.waseda.ac.jp> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Adding general performance benchmarking subsystem to perf.
> > This patch adds builtin-bench-pipe.c
> > 
> > builtin-bench-pipe.c is a benchmark program
> > to measure performance of pipe() system call.
> > This benchmark is based on pipe-test-1m.c by Ingo Molnar.
> > http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/tools/pipe-test-1m.c
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@....info.waseda.ac.jp>
> > Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> > Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
> > ---
> >  tools/perf/builtin-bench-pipe.c |   89 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >  create mode 100644 tools/perf/builtin-bench-pipe.c
> > 
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-bench-pipe.c b/tools/perf/builtin-bench-pipe.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..081515e
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-bench-pipe.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
> > +/*
> > + *
> > + * builtin-bench-pipe.c
> > + *
> > + * pipe: Benchmark for pipe()
> > + *
> > + * Based on pipe-test-1m.c by Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
> > + *  http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/tools/pipe-test-1m.c
> > + * Ported to perf by Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@....info.waseda.ac.jp>
> > + *
> > + */
> 

Thanks for your detailed comments, Ingo!
I read your comments and rewrote the patch series.
I'll sent the series later as new thread.

> Ok, i think there's going to be quite a few of these benchmarks, so i'd 
> suggest you start a new directory for the benchmark modules: 
> tools/perf/bench/ for example.
> 
> We'll still have tools/perf/builtin-bench.c which represents the highest 
> level 'perf bench' tool - and new modules can be added by adding them to 
> bench/.
> 
> What do you think?

I agree with your way making new bench/ directory.
I feel that modules of bench should not be at top of tools/perf/.

> 
> All in one, i very much like the modular direction you are taking here. 
> 

Thanks, I'm grad to hear it.

> There will be a handful of more details i'm sure but once there's a good 
> base we can commit it - would you / will you be interested in extending 
> it further and adding more benchmark modules as well?
> 
> There's quite a few useful small benchmarks that people are using to 
> measure the kernel. Having a good collection of them in one place, with 
> standardized options and standardized output would be very useful.

Yes, of course! Unified benchmarking utilities will be big help for
Linux users including me.

e.g. I think that copybench (http://code.google.com/p/copybench/) will be
good benchmark for I/O, memory and file system.
I'll work on this after that the patch series I'll send later is merged.

Do you know any other good candidates to include?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/