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 lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (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 4D400C433F5 for ; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 22:32:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:58356 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mznfw-00039z-IX for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 17:32:04 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:37056) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mznen-0002Nz-BG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 17:30:53 -0500 Received: from 9.mo548.mail-out.ovh.net ([46.105.48.137]:55211) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzned-0008GH-L0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 17:30:50 -0500 Received: from mxplan5.mail.ovh.net (unknown [10.108.4.141]) by mo548.mail-out.ovh.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA325202E2; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 22:30:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kaod.org (37.59.142.104) by DAG4EX1.mxp5.local (172.16.2.31) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.17; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 23:30:30 +0100 Authentication-Results: garm.ovh; auth=pass (GARM-104R005cdce0feb-a4c2-4793-98d6-a21997dced3e, 742E9276A26BC2B4C6C283707E5EBA255AB8FB31) smtp.auth=clg@kaod.org X-OVh-ClientIp: 82.64.250.170 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 23:30:28 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.3.0 Subject: Re: powernv gitlab ci regression Content-Language: en-US To: Daniel Henrique Barboza , Richard Henderson , qemu-devel , References: <461a77d6-a5d2-0ba1-de95-bc8cfa5fb83b@linaro.org> <9f1947e0-86d8-60e4-87bf-f4a5ec0d6ea8@gmail.com> <8ab3b465-dfec-8579-2b96-e0383f9bcc6f@gmail.com> From: =?UTF-8?Q?C=c3=a9dric_Le_Goater?= In-Reply-To: <8ab3b465-dfec-8579-2b96-e0383f9bcc6f@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [37.59.142.104] X-ClientProxiedBy: DAG5EX2.mxp5.local (172.16.2.42) To DAG4EX1.mxp5.local (172.16.2.31) X-Ovh-Tracer-GUID: c694cdab-6866-499b-892c-12ea8bdfca6e X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 6162613144280665056 X-VR-SPAMSTATE: OK X-VR-SPAMSCORE: -100 X-VR-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvuddruddtgedgudeifecutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfqggfjpdevjffgvefmvefgnecuuegrihhlohhuthemucehtddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpefkffggfgfuvfhfhfgjtgfgihesthekredttdefjeenucfhrhhomhepveorughrihgtpgfnvggpifhorghtvghruceotghlgheskhgrohgurdhorhhgqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeeigedvffekgeeftedutddttdevudeihfegudffkeeitdekkeetkefhffelveelleenucfkpheptddrtddrtddrtddpfeejrdehledrudegvddruddtgeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhhvghlohepmhigphhlrghnhedrmhgrihhlrdhovhhhrdhnvghtpdhinhgvtheptddrtddrtddrtddpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegtlhhgsehkrghougdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopegtlhhomhgsrghrugeslhhinhhugidrvhhnvghtrdhisghmrdgtohhm Received-SPF: pass client-ip=46.105.48.137; envelope-from=clg@kaod.org; helo=9.mo548.mail-out.ovh.net X-Spam_score_int: -38 X-Spam_score: -3.9 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-2.012, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" > Just rewrote the fore-mentioned patch using TCG ops. Here's some numbers running the tests on > my local machine: > > - using current master: > >  (1/1) tests/avocado/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc_powernv8: PASS (71.00 s) >  (1/1) tests/avocado/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc_powernv8: PASS (69.57 s) >  (1/1) tests/avocado/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc_powernv8: PASS (76.04 s) > > >  (1/1) tests/avocado/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc_powernv9: PASS (72.62 s) >  (1/1) tests/avocado/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc_powernv9: PASS (76.50 s) >  (1/1) tests/avocado/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc_powernv9: PASS (73.58 s) > > > - after my TCG Ops rewrite to count instructions: > > >  (1/1) tests/avocado/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc_powernv8: PASS (39.97 s) >  (1/1) tests/avocado/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc_powernv8: PASS (40.19 s) >  (1/1) tests/avocado/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc_powernv8: PASS (41.76 s) > >  (1/1) tests/avocado/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc_powernv9: PASS (40.88 s) >  (1/1) tests/avocado/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc_powernv9: PASS (41.49 s) >  (1/1) tests/avocado/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc_powernv9: PASS (42.04 s) > > > Also, there's a high possibility that the code I wrote is not optimized since I'm not well > versed with TCG ops/code. I expect that after a couple of reviews from Richard we might be able > to bring down those numbers even further. This is behaving like 6.2. We should be fine (until we add more counters :) > I'll clean this up and send for review. ok. We might have a last ppc PR in 2021. Thanks a lot, C.