On 10/17, Borislav Petkov wrote: >On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 06:57:43AM +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: >> On 2017.10.16 at 18:06 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:15 AM, Borislav Petkov <b...@alien8.de> wrote: >> > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:39:17AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> > >> >> > >> Greeting, >> > >> >> > >> FYI, we noticed a -61.0% regression of will-it-scale.per_process_ops >> > >> due to commit: >> >> I think you are reading this wrong: >> -61.0% regression means 61.0% improvement. > >Well, it has this: > >5b8809deb4b0a77f c4c3c3c2d00826c88b5c02c20e >---------------- -------------------------- > %stddev change %stddev > \ | \ > 448554 -61% 174892 will-it-scale.per_process_ops
Here 448554 is the average value of will-it-scale.per_process_ops for commit 5b8809deb4, while 174892 is the average value of will-it-scale.per_process_ops for commit c4c3c3c2d0, metric per_process_ops is calculated through raw output of will-it-scale as below example. 2017-10-14 23:43:02 ./runtest.py context_switch1 295 process 44 tasks,processes,processes_idle,threads,threads_idle,linear 0,0,100,0,100,0 44,7723745,22.45,0,0.00,0 per_process_ops = 7723745 / 44 = 175540 percent -61% is computed by (174892 - 448554) / 448554 Thanks, Xiaolong > >Xiaolong, can you first explain what those numbers mean? And how do you >compute those 61%? > >Thx. > >-- >Regards/Gruss, > Boris. > >Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
