linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/6] LoongArch: Add pv ipi support on LoongArch VM

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: <7867d9c8-22fb-4bfc-92dc-c782d29c56f9@xen0n.name>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 17:34:21 +0800
From: WANG Xuerui <kernel@...0n.name>
To: maobibo <maobibo@...ngson.cn>, Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>,
 Tianrui Zhao <zhaotianrui@...ngson.cn>, Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
 Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: loongarch@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/6] LoongArch: Add pv ipi support on LoongArch VM

On 2/17/24 11:15, maobibo wrote:
> On 2024/2/15 下午6:25, WANG Xuerui wrote:
>> On 2/15/24 18:11, WANG Xuerui wrote:
>>> Sorry for the late reply (and Happy Chinese New Year), and thanks for 
>>> providing microbenchmark numbers! But it seems the more comprehensive 
>>> CoreMark results were omitted (that's also absent in v3)? While the 
>>
>> Of course the benchmark suite should be UnixBench instead of CoreMark. 
>> Lesson: don't multi-task code reviews, especially not after consuming 
>> beer -- a cup of coffee won't fully cancel the influence. ;-)
>>
> Where is rule about benchmark choices like UnixBench/Coremark for ipi 
> improvement?

Sorry for the late reply. The rules are mostly unwritten, but in general 
you can think of the preference of benchmark suites as a matter of 
"effectiveness" -- the closer it's to some real workload in the wild, 
the better. Micro-benchmarks is okay for illustrating the points, but 
without demonstrating the impact on realistic workloads, a change could 
be "useless" in practice or even decrease various performance metrics 
(be that throughput or latency or anything that matters in the certain 
case), but get accepted without notice.

-- 
WANG "xen0n" Xuerui

Linux/LoongArch mailing list: https://lore.kernel.org/loongarch/