I do not see the actual results of the DTS perf test in the links you posted, only percentage of degradation or improvement, unless I miss something.

This was done on purpose as requested by the Members participating in the effort. This CI is meant for the DPDK maintainers to make sure that a patch does not introduce significant performance regressions on various hardware platforms, or to show how a patch may improve the performance of DPDK on these platforms (such as driver updates or something in the core of DPDK itself). It is not to compare the performance between different devices.

I believe it can be helpful if the baseline of the actual results will also be shown
to enable comparing to other vendors besides Intel and Mellanox.

There is not a single baseline for all devices. The baselines are generated per device. Knowing the baseline would allow creating an absolute result, which we are trying to avoid.

Do you plan to add such URL in the report sent to patchwork?

Created a ticket to add the URL to the emailed reports: https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=180

Instead of filtering based on the label, you could filter based on
the paths of modified files.
Note that such filter depends on the test you run,
because you could also test the doc syntax in the CI.

Okay, so if a series only modified the doc folder, then don't include it for performance tests. Later on, we can introduce syntax checking for documentation when we introduce more unit testing / functional testing. https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=181

On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 10:34 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:

04/01/2019 15:44, Jeremy Plsek:
> 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/).

Do you plan to add such URL in the report sent to patchwork?

> 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.

Instead of filtering based on the label, you could filter based on
the paths of modified files.
Note that such filter depends on the test you run,
because you could also test the doc syntax in the CI.