netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] NUMA aware scheduling per cpu vhost thread

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, 23 Mar 2012 14:21:04 -0700
From:	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To:	Thomas Lendacky <tahm@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:	Shirley Ma <mashirle@...ibm.com>,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] NUMA aware scheduling per cpu vhost thread

>
> Yeah, it becomes a question of time.  I run each test 3 times and
> average the results, so to run the full suite takes a long time.

I've found the "walk up the instance count with the interim results 
emitted" allows me quicker overall run time than launching all the 
netperfs at once with a long run time to kludge around skew.  Well 
modulo the time it takes to get them all launched.  But for the smallish 
stuff it is rather faster than the 15 minutes a data point I'd get with 
the (ab)use of the confidence intervals mechanism in runemomniagg2.sh . 
  It also avoids the "run one wait for it to finish, run two, wait for 
them to finish, run four, wait for them to finish" bit.  Walking-up the 
instance count leaving the previous instances going does mean that the 
"end of test" information is full of skew, but a great deal of that 
end-of-test information is invariant anyway.

happy benchmarking,

rick jones
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html