From: "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" <urezki@gmail.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@sonymobile.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: [PATCH-next 2/5] lib/test_vmalloc.c: add a new 'nr_threads' parameter
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2021 22:22:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210402202237.20334-2-urezki@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210402202237.20334-1-urezki@gmail.com>
By using this parameter we can specify how many workers are
created to perform vmalloc tests. By default it is one CPU.
The maximum value is set to 1024.
As a result of this change a 'single_cpu_test' one becomes
obsolete, therefore it is no longer needed.
Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@gmail.com>
---
lib/test_vmalloc.c | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/test_vmalloc.c b/lib/test_vmalloc.c
index 4eb6abdaa74e..d337985e4c5e 100644
--- a/lib/test_vmalloc.c
+++ b/lib/test_vmalloc.c
@@ -23,8 +23,8 @@
module_param(name, type, 0444); \
MODULE_PARM_DESC(name, msg) \
-__param(bool, single_cpu_test, false,
- "Use single first online CPU to run tests");
+__param(int, nr_threads, 0,
+ "Number of workers to perform tests(min: 1 max: 1024)");
__param(bool, sequential_test_order, false,
"Use sequential stress tests order");
@@ -50,13 +50,6 @@ __param(int, run_test_mask, INT_MAX,
/* Add a new test case description here. */
);
-/*
- * Depends on single_cpu_test parameter. If it is true, then
- * use first online CPU to trigger a test on, otherwise go with
- * all online CPUs.
- */
-static cpumask_t cpus_run_test_mask = CPU_MASK_NONE;
-
/*
* Read write semaphore for synchronization of setup
* phase that is done in main thread and workers.
@@ -386,16 +379,13 @@ struct test_case_data {
u64 time;
};
-/* Split it to get rid of: WARNING: line over 80 characters */
-static struct test_case_data
- per_cpu_test_data[NR_CPUS][ARRAY_SIZE(test_case_array)];
-
static struct test_driver {
struct task_struct *task;
+ struct test_case_data data[ARRAY_SIZE(test_case_array)];
+
unsigned long start;
unsigned long stop;
- int cpu;
-} per_cpu_test_driver[NR_CPUS];
+} *tdriver;
static void shuffle_array(int *arr, int n)
{
@@ -423,9 +413,6 @@ static int test_func(void *private)
ktime_t kt;
u64 delta;
- if (set_cpus_allowed_ptr(current, cpumask_of(t->cpu)) < 0)
- pr_err("Failed to set affinity to %d CPU\n", t->cpu);
-
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(test_case_array); i++)
random_array[i] = i;
@@ -450,9 +437,9 @@ static int test_func(void *private)
kt = ktime_get();
for (j = 0; j < test_repeat_count; j++) {
if (!test_case_array[index].test_func())
- per_cpu_test_data[t->cpu][index].test_passed++;
+ t->data[index].test_passed++;
else
- per_cpu_test_data[t->cpu][index].test_failed++;
+ t->data[index].test_failed++;
}
/*
@@ -461,7 +448,7 @@ static int test_func(void *private)
delta = (u64) ktime_us_delta(ktime_get(), kt);
do_div(delta, (u32) test_repeat_count);
- per_cpu_test_data[t->cpu][index].time = delta;
+ t->data[index].time = delta;
}
t->stop = get_cycles();
@@ -477,53 +464,56 @@ static int test_func(void *private)
return 0;
}
-static void
+static int
init_test_configurtion(void)
{
/*
- * Reset all data of all CPUs.
+ * A maximum number of workers is defined as hard-coded
+ * value and set to 1024. We add such gap just in case
+ * and for potential heavy stressing.
*/
- memset(per_cpu_test_data, 0, sizeof(per_cpu_test_data));
+ nr_threads = clamp(nr_threads, 1, 1024);
- if (single_cpu_test)
- cpumask_set_cpu(cpumask_first(cpu_online_mask),
- &cpus_run_test_mask);
- else
- cpumask_and(&cpus_run_test_mask, cpu_online_mask,
- cpu_online_mask);
+ /* Allocate the space for test instances. */
+ tdriver = kcalloc(nr_threads, sizeof(*tdriver), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (tdriver == NULL)
+ return -1;
if (test_repeat_count <= 0)
test_repeat_count = 1;
if (test_loop_count <= 0)
test_loop_count = 1;
+
+ return 0;
}
static void do_concurrent_test(void)
{
- int cpu, ret;
+ int i, ret;
/*
* Set some basic configurations plus sanity check.
*/
- init_test_configurtion();
+ ret = init_test_configurtion();
+ if (ret < 0)
+ return;
/*
* Put on hold all workers.
*/
down_write(&prepare_for_test_rwsem);
- for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpus_run_test_mask) {
- struct test_driver *t = &per_cpu_test_driver[cpu];
+ for (i = 0; i < nr_threads; i++) {
+ struct test_driver *t = &tdriver[i];
- t->cpu = cpu;
- t->task = kthread_run(test_func, t, "vmalloc_test/%d", cpu);
+ t->task = kthread_run(test_func, t, "vmalloc_test/%d", i);
if (!IS_ERR(t->task))
/* Success. */
atomic_inc(&test_n_undone);
else
- pr_err("Failed to start kthread for %d CPU\n", cpu);
+ pr_err("Failed to start %d kthread\n", i);
}
/*
@@ -541,29 +531,31 @@ static void do_concurrent_test(void)
ret = wait_for_completion_timeout(&test_all_done_comp, HZ);
} while (!ret);
- for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpus_run_test_mask) {
- struct test_driver *t = &per_cpu_test_driver[cpu];
- int i;
+ for (i = 0; i < nr_threads; i++) {
+ struct test_driver *t = &tdriver[i];
+ int j;
if (!IS_ERR(t->task))
kthread_stop(t->task);
- for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(test_case_array); i++) {
- if (!((run_test_mask & (1 << i)) >> i))
+ for (j = 0; j < ARRAY_SIZE(test_case_array); j++) {
+ if (!((run_test_mask & (1 << j)) >> j))
continue;
pr_info(
"Summary: %s passed: %d failed: %d repeat: %d loops: %d avg: %llu usec\n",
- test_case_array[i].test_name,
- per_cpu_test_data[cpu][i].test_passed,
- per_cpu_test_data[cpu][i].test_failed,
+ test_case_array[j].test_name,
+ t->data[j].test_passed,
+ t->data[j].test_failed,
test_repeat_count, test_loop_count,
- per_cpu_test_data[cpu][i].time);
+ t->data[j].time);
}
- pr_info("All test took CPU%d=%lu cycles\n",
- cpu, t->stop - t->start);
+ pr_info("All test took worker%d=%lu cycles\n",
+ i, t->stop - t->start);
}
+
+ kfree(tdriver);
}
static int vmalloc_test_init(void)
--
2.20.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-02 20:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-02 20:22 [PATCH-next 1/5] lib/test_vmalloc.c: remove two kvfree_rcu() tests Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2021-04-02 20:22 ` Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) [this message]
2021-04-02 21:59 ` [PATCH-next 2/5] lib/test_vmalloc.c: add a new 'nr_threads' parameter Andrew Morton
2021-04-03 12:31 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2021-04-06 2:39 ` Andrew Morton
2021-04-06 10:05 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2021-04-02 20:22 ` [PATCH-next 3/5] vm/test_vmalloc.sh: adapt for updated driver interface Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2021-04-02 20:22 ` [PATCH-next 4/5] mm/vmalloc: refactor the preloading loagic Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2021-04-02 20:22 ` [PATCH-next 5/5] mm/vmalloc: remove an empty line Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2021-04-02 20:30 ` Souptick Joarder
2021-04-02 20:58 ` Uladzislau Rezki
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=20210402202237.20334-2-urezki@gmail.com \
--to=urezki@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hdanton@sina.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=oleksiy.avramchenko@sonymobile.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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