From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yi...@intel.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2021 3:03 PM
On 1/19/2021 12:27 PM, Morten Brørup wrote:
From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ferruh Yigit
Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2021 1:01 PM
On 1/19/2021 8:53 AM, Morten Brørup wrote:
Could someone at Intel please update the test script to provide
output according to the test plan? Or delegate to the right person.
According to the test plan, the information requested by Olivier
should be in the test output already:
http://git.dpdk.org/tools/dts/tree/test_plans/nic_single_core_perf_test
_plan.rst?h=next
PS: I can't find out who is the maintainer of the test plan, so I'm
randomly pointing my finger at the test plan doc copyright holder.
:-)
Hi Morten,
Ali has a request to update the expected baseline, to be able to
detect
the
performance drops, let me internally figure out who can do this.
And do you have any other request, or asking same thing?
Hi Ferruh,
I am asking for something else:
The test script does not provide the output that its documentation
says that it does.
Apparently, the test script for nic_single_core_perf produces an
output table with these four columns (as seen at
https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/patchsets/15142/#env-18):
+--------+--------------------+-----------------------+----------
--------------------+
| Result | frame_size (bytes) | txd/rxd (descriptors) |
throughput Difference (Mpps) |
+--------+--------------------+-----------------------+----------
--------------------+
| PASS | 64 | 512 | 1.57100
|
+--------+--------------------+-----------------------+----------
--------------------+
| PASS | 64 | 2048 | 1.87500
|
+--------+--------------------+-----------------------+----------
--------------------+
But the test plan documentation (at
http://git.dpdk.org/tools/dts/tree/test_plans/nic_single_core_perf_test
_plan.rst) says that this output should be produced:
+------------+---------+-------------+---------+-----------------
----+
| Frame Size | TXD/RXD | Throughput | Rate | Expected
Throughput |
+------------+---------+-------------+---------+-----------------
----+
| 64 | 512 | xxxxxx Mpps | xxx % | xxx Mpps
|
+------------+---------+-------------+---------+-----------------
----+
| 64 | 2048 | xxxxxx Mpps | xxx % | xxx Mpps
|
+------------+---------+-------------+---------+-----------------
----+
Olivier and I am saying that only showing the Throughput Difference
(Mpps) does not provide any perspective to the result.
I am requesting that the Expected Throughput (Mpps) should be shown
in the result too, as documented in the test plan.
Ahh, this has a history, when the initial community lab infrastructure
prepared
some vendor(s) didn't want to show the actual throughput numbers.
That is why this diff and baseline introduced, and this is the how
current
infrastructure works. So this is not something related to Intel.
And as you can imagine this is not a technical issue, some companies
seems not
willing to share their performance numbers via community lab, and I
don't know
if something changed here in last a few years.
