Hi Patrick,
Yes, it makes sense.
Thanks for the note. Please let me know once its sorted out.

Thanks
Ajit

On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 7:46 AM Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
>
> Hi Ajit,
>
> One of the tests we run for the BRCM 57414 NIC in the dpdk community
> lab is a single core forwarding test in which we try to match line
> rate on the NIC, and protect against any performance regressions in
> DPDK. We track the MPPS forwarded between interfaces on the DUT,
> compare that metric against the most recent "baseline" run, and if the
> delta is more than 5% it is a fail. So the idea is if a significant
> regression is introduced on a patch, CI testing catches that.
>
> Right now on one of our ARM systems with brcm57414 this test is having
> high variance... more than the 5% threshold in some cases. I think
> this may in some way relate to the maintenance we did a few weeks back
> - we were seeing like .2% variance before. The expected throughput
> seems consistent, but the results have higher variance than normal.
> Obviously something is slightly wrong, and the system needs to be
> re-tuned a little or something. We can look at it (prefer to do any
> maintenance once all RCs are complete), but in the interim I want to
> just bump the accepted Delta from 5% to 7%, just to stop the false
> fails, but still maintain some coverage. Once we tune the system and
> reduce the results variance, we can return to 5%.
>
> Does this sound fine to you?
>
> Thanks,
> Patrick
>
> --
> Patrick Robb
>
> Technical Service Manager
>
> UNH InterOperability Laboratory
>
> 21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
>
> www.iol.unh.edu