netdev - [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: test_bpf: Print total time of test in the summary

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 21 Aug 2021 20:13:59 +0800
From:   Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>
Cc:     Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>, Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
        Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: test_bpf: Print total time of test in the summary

The total time of test is useful to compare the performance
when bpf_jit_enable is 0 or 1, so print it in the summary.

Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>
---
 lib/test_bpf.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/test_bpf.c b/lib/test_bpf.c
index 830a18e..b1b17ba 100644
--- a/lib/test_bpf.c
+++ b/lib/test_bpf.c
@@ -8920,6 +8920,9 @@ static __init int test_skb_segment_single(const struct skb_segment_test *test)
 static __init int test_skb_segment(void)
 {
 	int i, err_cnt = 0, pass_cnt = 0;
+	u64 start, finish;
+
+	start = ktime_get_ns();
 
 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(skb_segment_tests); i++) {
 		const struct skb_segment_test *test = &skb_segment_tests[i];
@@ -8935,8 +8938,10 @@ static __init int test_skb_segment(void)
 		}
 	}
 
-	pr_info("%s: Summary: %d PASSED, %d FAILED\n", __func__,
-		pass_cnt, err_cnt);
+	finish = ktime_get_ns();
+
+	pr_info("%s: Summary: %d PASSED, %d FAILED in %llu nsec\n",
+		__func__, pass_cnt, err_cnt, finish - start);
 	return err_cnt ? -EINVAL : 0;
 }
 
@@ -8944,6 +8949,9 @@ static __init int test_bpf(void)
 {
 	int i, err_cnt = 0, pass_cnt = 0;
 	int jit_cnt = 0, run_cnt = 0;
+	u64 start, finish;
+
+	start = ktime_get_ns();
 
 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(tests); i++) {
 		struct bpf_prog *fp;
@@ -8983,8 +8991,10 @@ static __init int test_bpf(void)
 		}
 	}
 
-	pr_info("Summary: %d PASSED, %d FAILED, [%d/%d JIT'ed]\n",
-		pass_cnt, err_cnt, jit_cnt, run_cnt);
+	finish = ktime_get_ns();
+
+	pr_info("Summary: %d PASSED, %d FAILED, [%d/%d JIT'ed] in %llu nsec\n",
+		pass_cnt, err_cnt, jit_cnt, run_cnt, finish - start);
 
 	return err_cnt ? -EINVAL : 0;
 }
@@ -9192,6 +9202,9 @@ static __init int test_tail_calls(struct bpf_array *progs)
 {
 	int i, err_cnt = 0, pass_cnt = 0;
 	int jit_cnt = 0, run_cnt = 0;
+	u64 start, finish;
+
+	start = ktime_get_ns();
 
 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(tail_call_tests); i++) {
 		struct tail_call_test *test = &tail_call_tests[i];
@@ -9222,8 +9235,10 @@ static __init int test_tail_calls(struct bpf_array *progs)
 		}
 	}
 
-	pr_info("%s: Summary: %d PASSED, %d FAILED, [%d/%d JIT'ed]\n",
-		__func__, pass_cnt, err_cnt, jit_cnt, run_cnt);
+	finish = ktime_get_ns();
+
+	pr_info("%s: Summary: %d PASSED, %d FAILED, [%d/%d JIT'ed] in %llu nsec\n",
+		__func__, pass_cnt, err_cnt, jit_cnt, run_cnt, finish - start);
 
 	return err_cnt ? -EINVAL : 0;
 }
-- 
2.1.0