netdev - Re: [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-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4226eb32-7755-5a32-5c58-7e64c129727c@iogearbox.net>
Date:   Mon, 23 Aug 2021 17:48:00 +0200
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        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: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: test_bpf: Print total time of test in the
 summary

On 8/21/21 2:13 PM, Tiezhu Yang wrote:
> 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;
>   }

I don't think this gives you any accurate results (e.g. what if this gets migrated
or preempted?); maybe rather use the duration from __run_one() ..

Thanks,
Daniel