Re: [MirageOS-devel] performance regression tests

[Richard Mortier <richard.mortier@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 15 February 2015 at 11:15, Anil Madhavapeddy <anil@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This is great to see -- thanks for working on this Masoud!
>
> In particular, having even a simple iperf test would let us test
> several interesting combinations straight away:
>
> - vary OCaml version (4.01 vs 4.02 is now supported), and there
>   is an experimental inlining branch in 4.03dev that could directly
>   be tested using this infrastructure.

ok-- so i guess that needs a switch/env var to specify the `opam switch` to use?

> - evaluate the impact of some features incoming such as the open
>   RFC for checksum offload.

how are they specified -- as a PR?
in which case, masoud-- i guess that
https://help.github.com/articles/checking-out-pull-requests-locally/
is a starting point for how to specify a particular PR rather than
simply a commit rev.

> In terms of immediate feedback, I'd request a version that just does
> iperf so that it has no dependencies on the host dom0 kernel.
> See: https://github.com/mirage/mirage-skeleton/pull/75

just to be clear -- you mean does iperf via unikernels, ie., all the
tests that are executed should also be unikernels rather than standard
tools so that we don't take dependencies on an underlying platform
like the dom0?

> For this repository, what is the supported dom0 kernel that is expected?
> The script tried to insmod a kmod that I didn't have.

over to masoud...

> Once there's even a minimal test, I'd like to recreate it on an
> infrastructure machine in Cambridge and have it run daily via cron
> alongside the is-mirage-broken scripts.

cool... (one day i must learn about the cambridge infrastructure machines :)

-- 
Richard Mortier
richard.mortier@xxxxxxxxxxxx

_______________________________________________
MirageOS-devel mailing list
MirageOS-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mirageos-devel