From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Cc: Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@leemhuis.info>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
KUnit Development <kunit-dev@googlegroups.com>,
Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] kernel.h further split
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2021 17:07:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YV8NLnoEZmdLVW5G@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YV8Ig9WyCk5kx634@smile.fi.intel.com>
On Thu, Oct 07, 2021 at 05:47:31PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 07, 2021 at 03:59:08PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 07, 2021 at 02:51:15PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 1:34 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > > <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > Meanwhile, Thorsten, can you have a look at my approach and tell if it
> > > makes sense?
> >
> > No, do not use ccache when trying to benchmark the speed of kernel
> > builds, that tests the speed of your disk subsystem...
>
> First rule of the measurement is to be sure WHAT we are measuring.
> And I'm pretty much explained WHAT and HOW. On the other hand, the
> kcbench can't answer to the question about C preprocessing speed
> without help of ccache or something similar.
>
> Measuring complete build is exactly not what we want because of
> O(compilation) vs. o(C preprocessing) meaning that any fluctuation
> in the former makes silly to measure anything from the latter.
>
> You see, my theory is proved by practical experiment:
>
> $ kcbench -i 3 -j 64 -o $O -s $PWD --no-download -m
> Processor: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v4 @ 2.20GHz [88 CPUs]
> Cpufreq; Memory: powersave [intel_pstate]; 128823 MiB
> Linux running: 5.6.0-2-amd64 [x86_64]
> Compiler: gcc (Debian 10.3.0-11) 10.3.0
> Linux compiled: 5.15.0-rc4
> Config; Environment: allmodconfig; CCACHE_DISABLE="1"
> Build command: make vmlinux modules
> Filling caches: This might take a while... Done
> Run 1 (-j 64): 464.07 seconds / 7.76 kernels/hour [P:6001%]
> Run 2 (-j 64): 464.64 seconds / 7.75 kernels/hour [P:6000%]
> Run 3 (-j 64): 486.41 seconds / 7.40 kernels/hour [P:5727%]
>
> $ kcbench -i 3 -j 64 -o $O -s $PWD --no-download -m
> Processor: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v4 @ 2.20GHz [88 CPUs]
> Cpufreq; Memory: powersave [intel_pstate]; 128823 MiB
> Linux running: 5.6.0-2-amd64 [x86_64]
> Compiler: gcc (Debian 10.3.0-11) 10.3.0
> Linux compiled: 5.15.0-rc4
> Config; Environment: allmodconfig; CCACHE_DISABLE="1"
> Build command: make vmlinux modules
> Filling caches: This might take a while... Done
> Run 1 (-j 64): 462.32 seconds / 7.79 kernels/hour [P:6009%]
> Run 2 (-j 64): 462.33 seconds / 7.79 kernels/hour [P:6006%]
> Run 3 (-j 64): 465.45 seconds / 7.73 kernels/hour [P:5999%]
>
> In [41]: numpy.median(y1)
> Out[41]: 464.64
>
> In [42]: numpy.median(y2)
> Out[42]: 462.33
>
> Speedup: +0.5%
Good, you measured what actually matters here, the real compilation of
the code, not just the pre-processing of it.
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-07 15:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-07 9:51 [PATCH v2 0/4] kernel.h further split Andy Shevchenko
2021-10-07 9:51 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] kernel.h: Drop unneeded <linux/kernel.h> inclusion from other headers Andy Shevchenko
2021-10-07 9:51 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] kernel.h: Split out container_of() and typeof_member() macros Andy Shevchenko
2021-10-07 10:37 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2021-10-07 10:38 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2021-10-07 9:51 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] lib/rhashtable: Replace kernel.h with the necessary inclusions Andy Shevchenko
2021-10-07 11:23 ` Herbert Xu
2021-10-07 11:44 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-10-08 2:18 ` Herbert Xu
2021-10-07 9:51 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] kunit: " Andy Shevchenko
2021-10-07 10:33 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] kernel.h further split Greg Kroah-Hartman
2021-10-07 11:51 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-10-07 13:59 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2021-10-07 14:47 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-10-07 15:07 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message]
2021-10-08 9:37 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2021-10-13 10:31 ` Andy Shevchenko
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=YV8NLnoEZmdLVW5G@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=brendanhiggins@google.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mchehab@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=regressions@leemhuis.info \
--cc=sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tgraf@suug.ch \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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.