linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/10] perf tests: Use lower sample

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:	Fri, 15 Nov 2013 15:03:54 +0900
From:	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>
Cc:	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] perf tests: Use lower sample_freq in sw clock event period test

Hi Arnaldo,

On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 11:41:01 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 09:07:36AM +0200, Adrian Hunter escreveu:
>> -#define NR_LOOPS  1000000
>> +#define NR_LOOPS  10000000
>
> Lower frequency, need to generate more noise, ugh. Adding that, but I
> think this test needs to be reworked, Namhyung?

Hmm.. We might go back to use the default frequency of 4000 (or 1000)
and make the loop based on time like using alarm or setitimer.

Or we can add an outer loop which doubles the inner loop counter if no
samples are collected.

What do you think?

Thanks,
Namhyung
--
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/