Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] Adding general performance benchmarkingsubsystem to perf.

From: Hitoshi Mitake
Date: Wed Nov 04 2009 - 05:33:25 EST

From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] Adding general performance benchmarking subsystem to perf.
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 18:24:07 +0100

> * Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > There will be a handful of more details i'm sure but once there's a
> > > good base we can commit it - would you / will you be interested in
> > > extending it further and adding more benchmark modules as well?
> > >
> > > There's quite a few useful small benchmarks that people are using to
> > > measure the kernel. Having a good collection of them in one place,
> > > with standardized options and standardized output would be very
> > > useful.
> >
> > Yes, of course! Unified benchmarking utilities will be big help for
> > Linux users including me.
> >
> > e.g. I think that copybench ( will
> > be good benchmark for I/O, memory and file system. I'll work on this
> > after that the patch series I'll send later is merged.
> copybench is listed as 'new BSD license'. Might need the pinging of its
> author whether he considers it GPLv2 compatible.

Yes. I'll contact the author when I try unifying copybench to perf actually.

> > Do you know any other good candidates to include?
> Frederic suggested dbench - although that's quite large as it includes a
> complete trace of a benchmark run.
> We might want to do similar measurements to lmbench.
> One nice thing would be to have a 'system call benchmark' set - one that
> measures _all_ system calls, and could thus be used to find regressions
> on a 'broad' basis. Syscall usage could be gleaned from the LTP project.

These are good candidates.
Especially system call benchmark is nice idea.
I'll try these after completion of base part.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at