From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6391D84D1B; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 13:08:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.20 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711372100; cv=none; b=XqaPO11HRhS/gE8g4Pc2S5GyoTLaAxb7P0nNmuzb7zTATtoNrk0EFtFkzOykVaZB9RNjBEhOvE5JXTIXuCblHjXdsR5NC9X/g0lTXGLhd1wHwof1i0bPxlRO6Jsg9+EO2nTRc3/hl3BrkOOXl/+OXAg4jpbjAi94uDTXBIQbB5I= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711372100; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4PI/TUfF/UJPyeIEUcIHtre7UdX4Ew/J+I0lCMM5Ric=; h=From:Date:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=X/ysvkgKBPmsmElfI9LE7ghrzPhFtljcOI04PThVMHx+80c5+dgX3PRdIpnv9wuVQjKgLs5hfOHi/rynnDz9Ki0recTkGe1dyf6OFfWg4sIAmBNt28iIK9SDq6ArOocJa03Ma1d4sUjLrRa0a2F3kiqiU8eZ45Mat0zTCjZOv9o= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=h+pqa6jw; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.20 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="h+pqa6jw" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1711372099; x=1742908099; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version; bh=4PI/TUfF/UJPyeIEUcIHtre7UdX4Ew/J+I0lCMM5Ric=; b=h+pqa6jwXsCB49Huxjo+mVuO5sbBlBmfiahEGCfYrmNuvoDfdIkKIkg7 s0b5W8ibNxT171rH5pCYo8mYM9aklLHqf/8LlpEQEX01YFbNTdxURXqVM ir1k5dC1ktyrvC9oN8gMHcsp2AMI6MRMDSnREcUyPz0LCJoJUslmh9Gk7 dlkitJ8RFSfY7QFSo2Qz8Skv70Y4qAtryG3rRMbxdoOCURyGYhmbABGRw JcyewYoKzZtHyax7ibjPX2fYPswclqm17TiI6DHPwQa57ls6mbaXV467R SpjZTxjdBTVvITX4d9QjjYyap4HwRrTvWwikzmD7p60vmxPv4P3292ySr g==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11023"; a="6267212" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,153,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="6267212" Received: from fmviesa003.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.143]) by orvoesa112.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Mar 2024 06:08:19 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,153,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="20146773" Received: from ijarvine-desk1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.247.19]) by fmviesa003-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Mar 2024 06:08:16 -0700 From: =?UTF-8?q?Ilpo=20J=C3=A4rvinen?= Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 15:08:09 +0200 (EET) To: Reinette Chatre cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Shuah Khan , Babu Moger , =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Maciej_Wiecz=F3r-Retman?= , Fenghua Yu , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/13] selftests/resctrl: Calculate resctrl FS derived mem bw over sleep(1) only In-Reply-To: <0910f9ed-2312-46b7-9c64-2982709da3d8@intel.com> Message-ID: <10baa8db-3143-fdd4-49a8-0298db90cc4f@linux.intel.com> References: <20240311135230.7007-1-ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com> <20240311135230.7007-3-ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com> <0910f9ed-2312-46b7-9c64-2982709da3d8@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="8323328-1681402267-1711372089=:1020" This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323328-1681402267-1711372089=:1020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE On Fri, 22 Mar 2024, Reinette Chatre wrote: > On 3/22/2024 5:11 AM, Ilpo J=C3=A4rvinen wrote: > > On Tue, 19 Mar 2024, Reinette Chatre wrote: > >> On 3/11/2024 6:52 AM, Ilpo J=C3=A4rvinen wrote: > >>> + * Return: =3D 0 on success. < 0 on failure. > >>> + */ > >>> +static int get_mem_bw_imc(char *bw_report, float *bw_imc) > >>> +{ > >>> +=09float reads, writes, of_mul_read, of_mul_write; > >>> +=09int imc, j; > >>> + > >>> +=09/* Start all iMC counters to log values (both read and write) */ > >>> +=09reads =3D 0, writes =3D 0, of_mul_read =3D 1, of_mul_write =3D 1; > >>> =20 > >>> =09/* > >>> =09 * Get results which are stored in struct type imc_counter_config > >=20 > >>> @@ -696,7 +725,6 @@ int resctrl_val(const struct resctrl_test *test, > >>> =09=09struct resctrl_val_param *param) > >>> { > >>> =09char *resctrl_val =3D param->resctrl_val; > >>> -=09unsigned long bw_resc_start =3D 0; > >> > >> In the current implementation the first iteration's starting measureme= nt > >> is, as seen above, 0 ... which makes the first measurement unreliable > >> and dropped for both the MBA and MBM tests. In this enhancement, the > >> first measurement is no longer skewed so much so I wonder if this enha= ncement > >> can be expanded to the analysis phase where first measurement no longe= r > >> needs to be dropped? > >=20 > > In ideal world, yes, but I'll have to check the raw numbers. My general= =20 > > feel is that the numbers tend to converge slowly with more iterations= =20 > > being run so the first iteration might still be "off" by quite much (th= is=20 > > is definitely the case with CAT tests iterations but I'm not entirely s= ure=20 > > any more how it is with other selftests). >=20 > >From what I can tell the CAT test is not dropping any results. It looks > to me that any "settling" is and should be handled in the test before > the data collection starts. It doesn't, but the "settling" is there in the raw numbers. I've=20 considered adding warm-up test(s) before the actual runs to improve the=20 situation but there's just so many thing still to do... --=20 i. --8323328-1681402267-1711372089=:1020--