Re: [PATCH v3 00/16] selftests/resctrl: resctrl_val() related cleanups & improvements

[Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>]

On 4/8/24 10:32, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> This series does a number of cleanups into resctrl_val() and
> generalizes it by removing test name specific handling from the
> function.
> 
> One of the changes improves MBA/MBM measurement by narrowing down the
> period the resctrl FS derived memory bandwidth numbers are measured
> over. My feel is it didn't cause noticeable difference into the numbers
> because they're generally good anyway except for the small number of
> outliers. To see the impact on outliers, I'd need to setup a test to
> run large number of replications and do a statistical analysis, which
> I've not spent my time on. Even without the statistical analysis, the
> new way to measure seems obviously better and makes sense even if I
> cannot see a major improvement with the setup I'm using.
> 
> This series has some conflicts with SNC series from Maciej (Maciej has
> privately agreed to base his series on top of this series) and also
> with the MBA/MBM series from Babu.
> 
> --
>   i.
> 
> v3:
> - Rename init functions to <testname>_init()
> - Replace for loops with READ+WRITE statements for clarity
> - Don't drop Return: entry from perf_open_imc_mem_bw() func comment
> - New patch: Fix closing of IMC fds in case of error
> - New patch: Make "bandwidth" consistent in comments & prints
> - New patch: Simplify mem bandwidth file code
> - Remove wrong comment
> - Changed grp_name check to return -1 on fail (internal sanity check)
> 

I can apply these for Linux 6.10-rc1 once I get an Ack from Reinette.

thanks,
-- Shuah