From: Arnon Warshavsky <arnon@qwilt.com>
To: "O'Driscoll, Tim" <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>
Cc: "Jerome Tollet (jtollet)" <jtollet@cisco.com>,
Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>,
"Xu, Qian Q" <qian.q.xu@intel.com>,
"moving@dpdk.org" <moving@dpdk.org>,
"Liu, Yong" <yong.liu@intel.com>, "ci@dpdk.org" <ci@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] proposal for DPDK CI improvement
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 12:47:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKy9EB25s5EapbFzd=tyAPkS20=tm_-qESspxROGTbLdDyQmZQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA6760D97B@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1442 bytes --]
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 12:34 PM, O'Driscoll, Tim <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>
wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: moving [mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Jerome Tollet
> > (jtollet)
> > Sent: Monday, November 7, 2016 10:27 AM
> > To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>; Xu, Qian Q
> > <qian.q.xu@intel.com>
> > Cc: moving@dpdk.org; Liu, Yong <yong.liu@intel.com>; ci@dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] proposal for DPDK CI improvement
> >
> > Hi Thomas & Qian,
> > IMHO, performance results should be centralized and executed in a
> > trusted & controlled environment.
> > If official DPDK numbers are coming from private lab’s vendors,
> > perception might be that they are not 100% neutral. That would probably
> > not help DPDK community to be seen open & transparent.
>
> +1
>
> Somebody (Jan Blunck I think) also said on last week's call that
> performance testing was a higher priority than CI for a centralized lab. A
> model where we have centralized performance test and distributed CI might
> work well.
+1 to the above approach , yet I still see value in publishing both types
of performance results as long as they are clearly separated.
This might might need a way to retroactively mark some results as "proved
invalid" but otoh encourage a cycle of propagating distributed tests proved
beneficial correct and unbiased to the central tests.
/Arnon
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2287 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-07 10:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-05 4:47 Liu, Yong
2016-11-05 19:15 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-11-07 5:15 ` Liu, Yong
2016-11-07 9:59 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-11-07 14:59 ` Liu, Yong
2016-11-07 7:55 ` Xu, Qian Q
2016-11-07 10:17 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-11-07 10:26 ` Jerome Tollet (jtollet)
2016-11-07 10:34 ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-11-07 10:47 ` Arnon Warshavsky [this message]
2016-11-07 10:56 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-11-07 12:20 ` Xu, Qian Q
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAKy9EB25s5EapbFzd=tyAPkS20=tm_-qESspxROGTbLdDyQmZQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=arnon@qwilt.com \
--cc=ci@dpdk.org \
--cc=jtollet@cisco.com \
--cc=moving@dpdk.org \
--cc=qian.q.xu@intel.com \
--cc=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
--cc=tim.odriscoll@intel.com \
--cc=yong.liu@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).