On Thu, 2014-06-19 at 23:51 +0000, Namhyung Kim wrote: > Hi Davidlohr, > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Davidlohr Bueso <davidl...@hp.com> wrote: > > Hi Namhyung, > > > > On Thu, 2014-06-19 at 15:14 +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote: > >> By adding a top-level option, I think it should be applied to all > >> benchmaks - but I guess it only supports sched messaging and futex, > >> right? > > > > Yes, for now only those. While there is opportunity for others to use it > > as well (perhaps shed-pipe & memcpy/memset), I don't think *all* > > benchmarks need multiple runs, ie: numa. > > Hmm.. but it'd make users confusing if one runs the numa benchmark > with -r 5 option but it only do a single run..
Yeah, it crossed my mind. For that to be addressed, we would have to come up with a way to determine if the argument was passed, and just inform the user that it is not [currently(?)] supported. Some alternatives would be to (i) explicitly document it, and/or (ii) print out the amount of runs that will be made and if that option is supported. All in all I think we need a better infrastructure for such things. I feel perf-bench suffers fundamental design issues and tries to cover too much. Thanks, Davidlohr -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
