From: Gyutae Bae <gyutae.opensource@navercorp.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org,
martin.lau@linux.dev, eddyz87@gmail.com, song@kernel.org,
yonghong.song@linux.dev, john.fastabend@gmail.com,
kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me, haoluo@google.com,
jolsa@kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, gyutae.bae@navercorp.com
Subject: [PATCH] selftests/bpf: Add perfbuf multi-producer benchmark
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 18:07:16 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260120090716.82927-1-gyutae.opensource@navercorp.com> (raw)
From: Gyutae Bae <gyutae.bae@navercorp.com>
Add a multi-producer benchmark for perfbuf to complement the existing
ringbuf multi-producer test. Unlike ringbuf which uses a shared buffer
and experiences contention, perfbuf uses per-CPU buffers so the test
measures scaling behavior rather than contention.
This allows developers to compare perfbuf vs ringbuf performance under
multi-producer workloads when choosing between the two for their systems.
Signed-off-by: Gyutae Bae <gyutae.bae@navercorp.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/run_bench_ringbufs.sh | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/run_bench_ringbufs.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/run_bench_ringbufs.sh
index 83e05e837871..123b7feb6935 100755
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/run_bench_ringbufs.sh
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/run_bench_ringbufs.sh
@@ -49,6 +49,11 @@ for b in 1 2 3 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52; do
summarize "rb-libbpf nr_prod $b" "$($RUN_RB_BENCH -p$b --rb-batch-cnt 50 rb-libbpf)"
done
+header "Perfbuf, multi-producer"
+for b in 1 2 3 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52; do
+ summarize "pb-libbpf nr_prod $b" "$($RUN_RB_BENCH -p$b --rb-batch-cnt 50 --rb-sample-rate 50 pb-libbpf)"
+done
+
header "Ringbuf, multi-producer contention in overwrite mode, no consumer"
for b in 1 2 3 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52; do
summarize "rb-prod nr_prod $b" "$($RUN_BENCH -p$b --rb-batch-cnt 50 --rb-overwrite --rb-bench-producer rb-libbpf)"
--
2.39.5 (Apple Git-154)
next reply other threads:[~2026-01-20 9:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-20 9:07 Gyutae Bae [this message]
2026-01-20 19:40 ` [PATCH] selftests/bpf: Add perfbuf multi-producer benchmark patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=20260120090716.82927-1-gyutae.opensource@navercorp.com \
--to=gyutae.opensource@navercorp.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=gyutae.bae@navercorp.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox