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 picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FFFCE7717F for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2024 12:29:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id A56733EBCDE for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2024 13:29:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-4.smtp.seeweb.it (in-4.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBFF13EB674 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2024 13:28:57 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: in-4.smtp.seeweb.it; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz (client-ip=2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:2; helo=smtp-out2.suse.de; envelope-from=pvorel@suse.cz; receiver=lists.linux.it) Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [IPv6:2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-4.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33AFF102F414 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2024 13:28:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [IPv6:2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7EEAB1F37E; Mon, 16 Dec 2024 12:28:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; none Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6263D137CF; Mon, 16 Dec 2024 12:28:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id 7l8MFwYdYGduSQAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Mon, 16 Dec 2024 12:28:54 +0000 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2024 13:28:48 +0100 From: Petr Vorel To: Li Wang Message-ID: <20241216122848.GA587325@pevik> References: <20241212060448.204158-1-liwang@redhat.com> <20241213224041.GB1577592@pevik> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 50.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 7EEAB1F37E X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Rspamd-Action: no action X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd2.dmz-prg2.suse.org X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.3 at in-4.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH V3] lib: multiply the max_runtime if detect slow kconfigs X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" Hi Li, ... > > > +/* > > > + * List of kernel config options that may degrade performance when > > enabled. > > > + */ > > > +static struct tst_kconfig_var slow_kconfigs[] = { > > > + TST_KCONFIG_INIT("CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING"), > > > + TST_KCONFIG_INIT("CONFIG_LOCKDEP"), > > > + TST_KCONFIG_INIT("CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK"), > > > + TST_KCONFIG_INIT("CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES"), > > > + TST_KCONFIG_INIT("CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES"), > > > + TST_KCONFIG_INIT("CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC"), > > Does CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC itself prolong the run? Isn't it that only when > > debug_guardpage_minorder=... or debug_pagealloc=... is set? > Good catch. > I guess that won't impact the kernel performance if not set any > of the parameters, because from the doc it is disabled by default. > "When CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC is set, this parameter > enables the feature at boot time. In default, it is disabled. > .... > if we don't enable it at boot time and the the system will work > mostly same with the kernel built without CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC." > So I would like to remove CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC from > the detecting. Or maybe to detect if debug_pagealloc kernel cmdline is set with tst_kcmdline_parse()? OTOH we run with debug_pagealloc=on only syscalls and some long running tests (e.g. bind06) are even slightly faster than when running without it. But that may be affected by QEMU host. Therefore let's skip CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC until I find a time to test how it affects the runtime. > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v5.2/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.html > > I would need to run the test with these to see the difference. > Any new found? I'm sorry I haven't tested yet. Feel free to not to wait and merge. I'll try to do it soon. Kind regards, Petr > > > + TST_KCONFIG_INIT("CONFIG_KASAN"), > > > + TST_KCONFIG_INIT("CONFIG_SLUB_RCU_DEBUG"), > > > + TST_KCONFIG_INIT("CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS"), > > > + TST_KCONFIG_INIT("CONFIG_LATENCYTOP"), > > > + TST_KCONFIG_INIT("CONFIG_DEBUG_NET"), > > > + TST_KCONFIG_INIT("CONFIG_EXT4_DEBUG"), > > > + TST_KCONFIG_INIT("CONFIG_QUOTA_DEBUG"), > > > + TST_KCONFIG_INIT("CONFIG_FAULT_INJECTION"), > > > + TST_KCONFIG_INIT("CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS") > > > +}; > > > + > > > +int tst_has_slow_kconfig(void) > > > +{ > > > + unsigned int i; > > > + > > > + tst_kconfig_read(slow_kconfigs, ARRAY_SIZE(slow_kconfigs)); > > > + > > Maybe here TINFO message "checking for options which slow the execution? > > Or print it (once) only if option detected? Because it's not obvious why > > we are > > detecting it. Or after searching print what we did (4x prolonged runtime). > Agree, the rest comments all look good. +1 Kind regards, Petr -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp