From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: "Ghannam, Yazen" <Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com>, x86-ml <x86@kernel.org>,
Yves Dionne <yves.dionne@gmail.com>,
Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin@inria.fr>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/CPU/AMD: Bring back Compute Unit ID
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 17:09:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170202160916.GA12498@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170202154359.fevz4fmwc6t4ew75@pd.tnic>
* Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 01:10:54PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > Now on to run the same thing on a bigger bulldozer.
>
> It looks differently on the bigger box:
>
> before:
>
> Performance counter stats for 'make -s -j17 bzImage' (3 runs):
> 143.807894000 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.89% )
>
> Performance counter stats for 'make -s -j17 bzImage' (3 runs):
> 147.109189694 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.49% )
If there's any doubt about the validity of the measurement I'd suggest doing:
perf stat -a --sync --repeat 3 ...
... so that there's no perf overhead and skew from the many processes of a kernel
build workload, plus the --sync should reduce IO related noise.
Or:
perf stat --null --sync --repeat 3 ...
... will only measure elapsed time, but will do that very precisely and with very
little overhead.
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-02 16:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-01 20:02 [RFC PATCH] x86/CPU/AMD: Bring back Compute Unit ID Borislav Petkov
2017-02-01 21:37 ` Ghannam, Yazen
2017-02-01 21:44 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-02-01 21:55 ` Ghannam, Yazen
2017-02-01 22:25 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-02-01 22:41 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-02-02 12:10 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-02-02 15:43 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-02-02 16:09 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2017-02-02 17:04 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-02-02 18:10 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-02-02 20:45 ` Ghannam, Yazen
2017-02-02 16:14 ` Ghannam, Yazen
2017-02-02 16:29 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170202160916.GA12498@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=Brice.Goglin@inria.fr \
--cc=Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yves.dionne@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.