Messages in this thread | | | From | Namhyung Kim <> | Date | Fri, 6 Jan 2023 13:04:42 -0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 0/4] perf: Add more syscalls to benchmark |
| |
Hello,
On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 5:23 PM Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn> wrote: > > > > On 12/03/2022 05:19 PM, Tiezhu Yang wrote: > > > > > > On 11/10/2022 11:50 AM, Tiezhu Yang wrote: > >> Tested on x86_64, arm64, mips64 and loongarch64. > >> > >> Tiezhu Yang (4): > >> tools x86: Keep list sorted by number in unistd_{32,64}.h > >> perf bench syscall: Introduce bench_syscall_common() > >> perf bench syscall: Add getpgid syscall benchmark > >> perf bench syscall: Add execve syscall benchmark > >> > >> tools/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/unistd_32.h | 23 ++++++--- > >> tools/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/unistd_64.h | 23 ++++++--- > >> tools/perf/bench/bench.h | 2 + > >> tools/perf/bench/syscall.c | 76 > >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > >> tools/perf/builtin-bench.c | 2 + > >> 5 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > >> > > > > Ping, any more comments? > > > > Thanks, > > Tiezhu > > Hi all, > > If this patch series has no value and is not acceptable, > or what should I do to update, please let me know.
I'm so sorry about being late a lot. I don't have any objection to this series.
For the execve bench, I think it's actually fork + execve then maybe it makes sense to have a fork only bench to compare the execve part precisely.
But it can be added later, so
Acked-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Thanks, Namhyung
| |