linux-kernel - Re: [net-next RFC V5 0/5] Multiqueue virtio-net

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]

Message-ID: <4FFB0AF7.1080604@hp.com>
Date:	Mon, 09 Jul 2012 09:46:47 -0700
From:	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To:	Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
CC:	mst@...hat.com, mashirle@...ibm.com, krkumar2@...ibm.com,
	habanero@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
	tahm@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, jwhan@...ewood.snu.ac.kr,
	davem@...emloft.net, akong@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	sri@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [net-next RFC V5 0/5] Multiqueue virtio-net

On 07/08/2012 08:23 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
> On 07/07/2012 12:23 AM, Rick Jones wrote:
>> On 07/06/2012 12:42 AM, Jason Wang wrote:
>> Which mechanism to address skew error?  The netperf manual describes
>> more than one:
>
> This mechanism is missed in my test, I would add them to my test scripts.
>>
>> http://www.netperf.org/svn/netperf2/trunk/doc/netperf.html#Using-Netperf-to-Measure-Aggregate-Performance
>>
>>
>> Personally, my preference these days is to use the "demo mode" method
>> of aggregate results as it can be rather faster than (ab)using the
>> confidence intervals mechanism, which I suspect may not really scale
>> all that well to large numbers of concurrent netperfs.
>
> During my test, the confidence interval would even hard to achieved in
> RR test when I pin vhost/vcpus in the processors, so I didn't use it.

When running aggregate netperfs, *something* has to be done to address 
the prospect of skew error.  Otherwise the results are suspect.

happy benchmarking,

rick jones
--
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/