From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi1-f179.google.com (mail-oi1-f179.google.com [209.85.167.179]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3AC61B4A1 for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2019 15:44:41 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-oi1-f179.google.com with SMTP id y1so30517103oie.12 for ; Fri, 04 Jan 2019 06:44:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=FCG/XpcN1DSb0q/vq2du+q5nH3Caf08Bi6UUvBEmGgk=; b=NWLKQXQiuW/naajhFNzpvfJY52Xu40y2402+piv0CeJVz/0xcu+U8XjiYgpp3JaCSM 4L6kAcXjmfRdM2qtQhiFGMPcR3dORGRyD8JfUhu3f2wxKMAeUOrLRF4Nh8gkXaPXZjPl T7EHjo0Z0qiSm4lWEsemijwWWUHnb4GKEbMe8= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FCG/XpcN1DSb0q/vq2du+q5nH3Caf08Bi6UUvBEmGgk=; b=OSuqBbRIxa/+SIBTuQ3+tfPmY9YS+qDQAHA8JWwLj/fbLBWuAWupubigiiUqhGyZsj U+WLIja3IRmpoSpcTNpbVwyKBwVqCPKAHAtGSxA7etLyUhXWTYP/hmG7xGsM2p6IJTtu mgUo4AEwbniHWLzfE/3T3mSrJlrERwVacazMwSKlfx2+sPTY3e6X5pZkBtOOyQJZpysa lYh6RgIoZYoEYR+I43qftBQJdj0ZZeiLgQeayLV12ktogXGTofLJFQZydLMihKoWXS/8 Wd8bWeTpuzC25ikQw1+CCkd0fL+HkJR+ppQAHDRJfLPjzIZg8FRGLK2UUtORGgrzjIXZ yFiA== X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWbNI6FC09LYP/kKIMM3wflfkdTRYM6fAHx9FHvr8uF9QVe62VE7 o8N1glGBCTaTA2aIziSIprC6Yei64G2wqB7AOXzX0w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/UG9kHWuFOoZPFTWomRKKIvh3o5Om7ljOqsZ+HgXDHG4r/h/HK5EKX1wtShZ7TyCmiWvHnHtpsujAtsDGHp6PA= X-Received: by 2002:aca:5f0b:: with SMTP id t11mr35921772oib.162.1546613081174; Fri, 04 Jan 2019 06:44:41 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Jeremy Plsek Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2019 09:44:04 -0500 Message-ID: To: Rami Rosen Cc: ci@dpdk.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004f0c9e057ea2eb1e" Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] Question about performance test X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK CI discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2019 14:44:42 -0000 --0000000000004f0c9e057ea2eb1e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Rami, I'm the current maintainer of the DPDK Performance CI. I realize that the performance results don't point to the website, so it's not obvious on where to find this information. You can find an overview of these tests here: https://lab.dpdk.org Most of this information can be either found on the detailed results of a test (such as https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/patchsets/4157/) or on the about page (https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/about/). But to answer your questions: At the moment, we only run performance tests. Specifically the nic_single_core_perf_test from the DPDK Test Suite with the TRex traffic generator. The devices we are testing are currently the Intel 82599ES 10G, the Intel XL710-QDA2 40G, the Mellanox ConnectX-5 100G, and the ConnectX-4 Lx 25G and 40G. We don't apply the doc folder when applying the series, in case a patch included code unrelated to documentation. If others in the group feel that it's still unnecessary to include "doc" labeled series, I can look into filtering them out. Thanks. On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 5:46 AM Rami Rosen wrote: > Hi, > I have a question about DPDK CI process and the tests done when a patch is > submitted to dpdk-dev mailing list. > In DPDK patch work I see these response messages from the DPDK CI for all > patches: > > ... > ci/intel-Performance-Testing success Performance Testing PASS > ci/mellanox-Performance-Testing success Performance Testing PASS > ... > > My question is (I hope and believe the info is available publicly) : which > tests are run in the ci, generating these messages? is it done with IXIA > and DTS ? (DPDK test suite, https://doc.dpdk.org/dts/gsg/) ? are these > l2fwd/l3fwd performance tests? or more than that ? and on which > Intel/Mellanox nics ? Are these merely performance tests, or also > functional tests ? > > And BTW, I noticed that the CI runs a full performance cycle also for doc > patches (at least these messages are generated), which is a kind of > redundant (unless there is some filter which checks that if a patch only > affects modules under "doc", than such a cycle is not done but the messages > are still sent) > > Regards, > Rami Rosen > -- Jeremy Plsek UNH InterOperability Laboratory --0000000000004f0c9e057ea2eb1e Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Rami,

I'm the curr= ent maintainer of the DPDK Performance CI. I realize that the performance r= esults don't point to the website, so it's not obvious on where to = find this information. You can find an overview of these tests here: https://lab.dpdk.org

Most of this information can be either found on the detailed results of a= test (such as https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/patchsets/4157/) or on th= e about page (htt= ps://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/about/).

B= ut to answer your questions:
At the moment, we only run performan= ce tests. Specifically the nic_single_core_perf_test from the DPDK Test Sui= te with the TRex traffic generator.
The devices we are testing ar= e currently the Intel 82599ES 10G, the Intel XL710-QDA2 40G, the Mellanox C= onnectX-5 100G, and the ConnectX-4 Lx 25G and 40G.

We don't apply the doc folder when applying the series, in case a patc= h included code unrelated to documentation. If others in the group feel tha= t it's still unnecessary to include "doc" labeled series, I c= an look into filtering them out.

Thanks.
=

=
On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 5:46= AM Rami Rosen <ramirose@gmail.com= > wrote:
=
Hi,
I have a questio= n about DPDK CI process and the tests done when a patch is submitted to dpd= k-dev mailing list.
In DPDK patch work I see these response messa= ges from the DPDK CI for all patches:

...
ci/intel-Performance-Testing<= span style=3D"white-space:pre-wrap"> success Performance Testing PASS
ci/mellanox-Performance-Testing success = Performance Testing PASS=C2=A0
...

My question is (I hope and believe the info is available publicly) : whic= h tests are run in the ci, generating these messages?=C2=A0 is it done with= IXIA and DTS ? (DPDK test suite,=C2=A0https://doc.dpdk.org/dts/gsg/) ? are these l2fw= d/l3fwd performance tests? or more than that ? and on which Intel/Mellanox = nics ?=C2=A0=C2=A0A= re these merely performance tests, or also=C2=A0
functional tests ?=C2=A0
<= span style=3D"font-size:14px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:"Helvetic= a Neue",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif">
And BTW, I noticed that the CI runs a full performa= nce cycle also for doc patches (at least these messages are generated), whi= ch is a kind of redundant (unless there is some filter which checks that if= a patch only affects modules under "doc", than such a cycle is n= ot done but the messages are still sent)

=
Regards,
Rami Rosen


--
Jeremy Plsek
UNH InterOperability Laboratory
<= /div>
--0000000000004f0c9e057ea2eb1e--