[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091103074648.GG19928@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 08:46:48 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@....info.waseda.ac.jp>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Frédéric_Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] Adding general performance benchmarking
subsystem to perf.
* 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>
> + *
> + */
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?
All in one, i very much like the modular direction you are taking here.
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.
Ingo
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists