On 10/17/2018 12:28 PM, Prakhya, Sai Praneeth wrote: >>> No, the selftest in this patch set will not replace intel-cmt-cat or >>> vice versa. >>> >>> The selftest in this patch set has a different purpose from intel-cmt-cat: >>> the selftest is a test tool which validates resctrl functionalities >>> while intel-cmt-cat is mainly a utility that provides base library for >>> higher level applications including performance analysis tools, >>> benchmark measurement tools, and potential resctrl tests. For example, >>> running MBA test in the selftests tells MBA working or not working >>> (fail/pass) right way. The >> >> Ok. Sure. Let me take a look at selftest closely. Will send my feedback soon. > > Great! > >> >>> intel-cmt-cat doesn't have this testing capability unless we extend >>> the tool. >>> >>> And intel-cmt-cat is maintained and developed by Intel. I don't think >>> it's easy to extend it to AMD and ARM features. The selftest will be >>> maintained >> >> We1l.. We were hoping to have a common tool across. It makes it easy for >> distros. Probably, we can have a separate discussion on this. >> > > The main goal of this test suite is to validate values reported by resctrl > features > i.e. we need _some_way_ to check if values reported by resctrl features are > correct or not. > > For (Intel) Memory Bandwidth features like MBA and MBM, perf iMC > (Integrated Memory Controller) is used for validation. As a part of test, we > run a > benchmark (eg: fill_buf) and get memory bandwidth values from MBM and iMC > and verify if the difference between both the reported values are in a > reasonable range. > > To make this common across x86, could you please let us know if similar > things > (i.e. perf iMC) exist on AMD? If so, you could add it in. The same applies > for ARM.
We dont have iMC. You can go ahead with what you have right now. We can add those details later if required. > > Regards, > Sai >
