From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF3A7A0571 for ; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 15:14:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 869F41BFEF; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 15:14:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-io1-f45.google.com (mail-io1-f45.google.com [209.85.166.45]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ECCB3B5 for ; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 15:14:22 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-io1-f45.google.com with SMTP id x21so3644576iox.13 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2020 06:14:22 -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=m58ekWVO/3+A2t+WWQvZ/psUNurosRV+4FbKsa0fSYo=; b=gfQMlJLsvygFpVHD1CSnu7cHWQDq0QXPtziapRwnNFELRAh7GHvRSlsiHTVIMb9MhC vRH8L7yXWS6VZLGXyKNvjX6jSMSQF8i6HxLrCIiUCUJxqmaseuqZbn6DWMhDcsrcoq4b gctvwn4OTf4TgKZNSTHitEu/2wSmbL7X2XDnM= 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=m58ekWVO/3+A2t+WWQvZ/psUNurosRV+4FbKsa0fSYo=; b=kWnWhZbQeNRdTZJEzqyV4TyhUKa2rR3bVajsCxmLLypIdWfI+cCWYkt5urI2Wu1edQ BAk/axqlE1i7FiaKoQktLPJkopE8j8P2CIBHmoRbmOhwdxXBzPDB9d29SJHCVdxqn1Ts l8vwBtdb7YHH4KDRumslCGSVFIspA22FCQOhr4/uZeJXkAypSMcicLS0dQMSLFXLkiT7 b6VIDXfWOjaHDC32bpf0I+lU01arq+jF1QfPpbnel80xfI/vJKMjnQwPts0sYnWXoIF3 cS96fEdkGJMeUmESr56kDiHx1zZGBKJ/rQJzsoeD8aR5nt+XU/iPYKDd+Wx3jEDBjr/9 Eadw== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ2MzF8C/dibcQruyFJmXo6u9TN+GXRxIBy36kkeSCj1wjACrY47 0ZnDFju7jawuNaVxmht0qYlozhlsBW4z7leqMn0/bA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vt5MjGeAf/ShtParIk1CysNsxwRz+FZ3k/Z2qWGzSN/FgzPK/jDpslBcWbNE50cnN+c+8hYU8rgus2qm9bnSWk= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:3942:: with SMTP id g63mr4323984ioa.78.1583244860436; Tue, 03 Mar 2020 06:14:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1827408.xz2uEaWSZ7@xps> <9DEEADBC57E43F4DA73B571777FECECA41EAB066@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> <9DEEADBC57E43F4DA73B571777FECECA41EBB4AF@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: From: Brandon Lo Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 09:13:44 -0500 Message-ID: To: David Marchand Cc: "Chen, Zhaoyan" , dpdklab@iol.unh.edu, Lincoln Lavoie , Thomas Monjalon , "ci@dpdk.org" , "Tu, Lijuan" , "Xu, Qian Q" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007fd475059ff3ebe2" Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdklab] Re: Intel performance test is failing 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: , Errors-To: ci-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "ci" --0000000000007fd475059ff3ebe2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi David and Zhaoyan, > Yes, those results are related to the Intel machine; I have disabled testing for the Intel testbed. The 82599ES machine is now available for ssh and modifications. Thanks On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 4:22 AM David Marchand wrote: > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 4:58 AM Chen, Zhaoyan > wrote: > >> Thanks Jeremy. >> >> >> >> I quickly checked per-patches results and logs for the failures. That >> seems not always failed case.. like fluctuation. >> >> >> >> For this case, could you help to check >> >> - if BIOS=E2=80=99s turbo boost is off, C0/C1 is off, C6 is off >> >> - if cores=E2=80=99 are isolated in kernel=E2=80=99s parameter >> >> - if other tasks are scheduled on the testbed when running performance >> test >> >> >> >> If all settings are good, we may consider it=E2=80=99s a regression or u= nstable >> performance issue. We will double check the performance by IXIA with lat= est >> DPDK master when we back to office (1 week later). >> > > (replaced jeremy @mail with the dpdklab alias). > > Is this issue linked to the failures I see? > > https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/patchsets/9799/ > https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/patchsets/9800/ > https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/patchsets/9804/ > https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/patchsets/9809/ > https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/patchsets/9814/ > https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/patchsets/9820/ > > > Thanks. > > -- > David Marchand > --=20 Brandon Lo UNH InterOperability Laboratory 21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824 blo@iol.unh.edu www.iol.unh.edu --0000000000007fd475059ff3ebe2 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi David and Zhaoyan,

Yes, those results are r= elated to the Intel machine; I have disabled testing for the Intel testbed.=

The=C2=A082599ES machine is now available for ssh= and modifications.

Thanks



=C2=A0


<= /div>

On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 4:22 AM David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> wrote:
=
On Mon, Feb 3, 202= 0 at 4:58 AM Chen, Zhaoyan <zhaoyan.chen@intel.com> wrote:

Thanks Jeremy.

=C2=A0

I quickly checked per-patches results and= logs for the failures. That seems not always failed case.. like fluctuatio= n.

=C2=A0

For this case, could you help to check=

- if BIOS=E2=80=99s turbo boost is off, C= 0/C1 is off, C6 is off

- if cores=E2=80=99 are isolated in kerne= l=E2=80=99s parameter

- if other tasks are scheduled on the tes= tbed when running performance test

=C2=A0

If all settings are good, we may consider= it=E2=80=99s a regression or unstable performance issue. We will double ch= eck the performance by IXIA with latest DPDK master when we back to office (1 week later). =C2=A0


(replaced jeremy @mail with th= e dpdklab alias).

Is this issue linked to the = failures I see?



Thanks.

--
David Marchand


--

Brandon Lo

UNH = InterOperability Laboratory

21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824

blo@iol.unh.edu

<= a href=3D"http://www.iol.unh.edu/" target=3D"_blank">www.iol.unh.edu

--0000000000007fd475059ff3ebe2--