From: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>,
davem@davemloft.net, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org,
Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
KUnit Development <kunit-dev@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1 1/2] crypto: tcrypt: minimal conversion to run under KUnit
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2021 13:33:46 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABVgOSnde5VmF8TLfF=B4Nbvo7C5GUJ91OY9Rct-ksyPaTtpcw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210730025544.GA12781@gondor.apana.org.au>
On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 10:55 AM Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 12:31:28PM -0700, Daniel Latypov wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, that makes a lot of sense.
> > In that case, how useful would `kunit.py run` be? I.e. Do people
> > mostly want to see numbers on bare metal?
>
> I think it's a mix of both. As in performance on bare metal and
> under virtualisation may be of interest. I don't think you're going
> to be going through kunit for the speed tests though, because you
> need to supply module parameters for tcrypt to do that.
FYI, there is a patch for kunit_tool which will allow kernel
parameters to be passed through:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-kselftest/patch/20210715160819.1107685-1-dlatypov@google.com/
That being said, no-one's ever used any of the KUnit tooling for
performance testing before, as far as I know, so whether or not it
turns out to be useful or not remains to be seen. With this patch,
it'd at least be an option if you wanted to try it.
-- David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-30 5:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-15 21:31 [RFC v1 0/2] crypto: tcrypt: small changes to run under KUnit Daniel Latypov
2021-07-15 21:31 ` [RFC v1 1/2] crypto: tcrypt: minimal conversion " Daniel Latypov
2021-07-23 6:43 ` Herbert Xu
2021-07-23 19:31 ` Daniel Latypov
2021-07-30 2:55 ` Herbert Xu
2021-07-30 5:33 ` David Gow [this message]
2021-07-15 21:31 ` [RFC v1 2/2] crypto: tcrypt: call KUNIT_FAIL() instead of pr_err() Daniel Latypov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CABVgOSnde5VmF8TLfF=B4Nbvo7C5GUJ91OY9Rct-ksyPaTtpcw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=davidgow@google.com \
--cc=brendanhiggins@google.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dlatypov@google.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).