Message ID | 1579210366-55429-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | selftests/resctrl: Add resctrl selftest | expand |
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 01:32:33PM -0800, Fenghua Yu wrote: > [Resend the v9 patch set to Shuah Khan and linux-kselftest mailing list. > No code and commit message change.] > > With more and more resctrl features are being added by Intel, AMD > and ARM, a test tool is becoming more and more useful to validate > that both hardware and software functionalities work as expected. Hi, Khan, Any comment on the resctrl selftest tool? Any plan to push the patches to upstream? Thanks. -Fenghua
On 1/16/20 2:32 PM, Fenghua Yu wrote: > [Resend the v9 patch set to Shuah Khan and linux-kselftest mailing list. > No code and commit message change.] > > With more and more resctrl features are being added by Intel, AMD > and ARM, a test tool is becoming more and more useful to validate > that both hardware and software functionalities work as expected. > > We introduce resctrl selftest to cover resctrl features on X86, AMD > and ARM architectures. It first implements MBM (Memory Bandwidth > Monitoring), MBA (Memory Bandwidth Allocation), L3 CAT (Cache Allocation > Technology), and CQM (Cache QoS Monitoring) tests. We will enhance > the selftest tool to include more functionality tests in the future. > > The tool has been tested on Intel RDT, AMD QoS and ARM MPAM and is > in tools/testing/selftests/resctrl in order to have generic test code > base for all architectures. > > The selftest tool we are introducing here provides a convenient > tool which does automatic resctrl testing, is easily available in kernel > tree, and covers Intel RDT, AMD QoS and ARM MPAM. > > There is an existing resctrl test suite 'intel_cmt_cat'. But its major > purpose is to test Intel RDT hardware via writing and reading MSR > registers. It does access resctrl file system; but the functionalities > are very limited. And it doesn't support automatic test and a lot of > manual verifications are involved. Thanks for the series. Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I will pull these in for 5.7. Couple of global comments and things to watch out for: - Are there checks to prevent this tool from compiling/running on architectures that don't support and/or exits gracefully? I didn't see arch checks in the Makefile. I am pulling them in and these can be fixed later. Sorry for the delay. thanks, -- Shuah