From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EADBC433FE for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 19:03:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231211AbiJNTDD (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Oct 2022 15:03:03 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33848 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230305AbiJNTDA (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Oct 2022 15:03:00 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x435.google.com (mail-pf1-x435.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::435]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B28A1905DD for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 12:02:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x435.google.com with SMTP id m6so5795386pfb.0 for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 12:02:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=93SM5edoQTmh30dhmcftbv07FMloClt4sRz/Es4IFlM=; b=BUJRV0Pc2cbfpCvcp0VnINHf8OFz/twYIlfpd4Oyf50KGIddch6YqP9L/dp6C+D7Md GmPFvjkicX1rvEyRJDsvivlcJW5pBFTP2t1E/IBV3J9JoNBff6RYngi9r7psUHt8UOGR ruYq+PfEDjUWW1GkfJwZiSah0WpONl7pW00iqVCpZ0jraczJaw0Iaz08dPZus3Msxg4Z ss8BCwyflYryxfQ3BV2WEcYL1nRSsT63Dg9W8Y4wlKimRoUha2ibmRsVNUcy9PD0Grsc OPtdEtjlbt0fKRZ3Q9s9hyEsPjyzlQTMJEiTdHaDM561/iCSmwZ420LAJRIBk7iW8VL7 25QA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=93SM5edoQTmh30dhmcftbv07FMloClt4sRz/Es4IFlM=; b=zoc12WFbZbD8OOmkQsAI3lRBv75gB+me3XTLvjZzbwSH2w7V3kcuYJBKN8JsMt5pgi EK8fWc0trMkCfyaUGyBOkVuo+suM2qe1MHXR4ujdLrGRh/eGIuyLV3bC0mIQirYjbfT/ ejcWJ2nCqrYc97MzMjN99q3LwlXp20VAoGO9yWUC/b0RFhKHpeTXIP3G76MEsvh7HrfO H+gUOElGisHR0weHWMb6vjbso/q1Hy5Qw4GDL2BQ86QDAAOgV31hStaAcuEqU1DWupSt Wc4khmFdeon+XiqtSou5t2tPs4PaxKBOOK3wS3Er+O8Jl5Hj2U7azu3mxLC6uuMJjKzU m+pw== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf16pE3OtAQvx09sVCjcFPZy5GVQUWJH3bdtUvC9U1VPLfWG3oTz Tdkv38eA0YHyFJ/SDF3Ov7yKSdAd5ZsuYg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM71eRcCLDDCqpb7XXz4/MQpa6Z2VN36ZgDsI/P22mjS9jZp1Izpx/9ABooVI5nyhiKSWq3Tsw== X-Received: by 2002:a63:454d:0:b0:43c:e834:ec0 with SMTP id u13-20020a63454d000000b0043ce8340ec0mr5999924pgk.270.1665774178987; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 12:02:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com (7.104.168.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.168.104.7]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g17-20020aa79dd1000000b0053e5daf1a25sm2087262pfq.45.2022.10.14.12.02.58 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 14 Oct 2022 12:02:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2022 19:02:54 +0000 From: Sean Christopherson To: Vipin Sharma Cc: "Wang, Wei W" , David Matlack , "andrew.jones@linux.dev" , "pbonzini@redhat.com" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/5] dirty_log_perf_test vCPU pinning Message-ID: References: <20221010220538.1154054-1-vipinsh@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 14, 2022, Vipin Sharma wrote: > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 9:55 AM David Matlack wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 9:34 AM Sean Christopherson wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022, Wang, Wei W wrote: > > > > Just curious why not re-using the existing tools (e.g. taskset) to do the pinning? > > > > > > IIUC, you're suggesting the test give tasks meaningful names so that the user can > > > do taskset on the appropriate tasks? The goal is to ensure vCPUs are pinned before > > > they do any meaningful work. I don't see how that can be accomplished with taskset > > > without some form of hook in the test to effectively pause the test until the user > > > (or some run script) is ready to continue. > > > > A taskset approach would also be more difficult to incorporate into > > automated runs of dirty_log_perf_test. > > > > > > > > Pinning aside, naming the threads is a great idea! That would definitely help > > > debug, e.g. if one vCPU gets stuck or is lagging behind. > > > > +1 > > I also like the idea. > > Sean: > Do you want a v6 with the naming patch or you will be fine taking v5, > if there are no changes needed in v5, and I can send a separate patch > for naming? Definitely separate, this is an orthogonal change and I don't think there will be any conflict. If there is a conflict, it will be trivial to resolve. But since Wei provided a more or less complete patch, let's let Wei post a formal patch (unless he doesn't want to).