[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cd1d542c-ceb9-4c91-aaf9-de702824803a@email.android.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2014 14:23:04 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
CC: Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] x86: entry_64.S: always allocate complete "struct pt_regs"
It would be nice to automate running a T-test on it.
On August 2, 2014 2:14:50 PM PDT, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
>On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 3:13 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
>> On 08/01/2014 03:11 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Could you please try to see if there is a measurable change in the
>>>> latency of a trivial syscall?
>>>
>>> Will do.
>>> Something along the lines of "how long does it take to execute two
>>> gazillions of getppid()?"
>>>
>>
>> Something like that, yes, but you have to run enough data points so
>you
>> can determine if the difference is statistically significant or just
>noise.
>
>Denys, if you want to avoid five minutes of programming, you can build
>this:
>
>https://gitorious.org/linux-test-utils/linux-clock-tests/
>
>and run timing_test_64 10 getpid
>
>It doesn't do real statistics, but it seems to get quite stable
>results.
>
>--Andy
--
Sent from my mobile phone. Please pardon brevity and lack of formatting.
--
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