Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: reduce PMU multiplexing influence #1489

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 25, 2023

Conversation

bowen-intel
Copy link
Contributor

Ⅰ. Describe what this PR does

By amplifying the results obtained through 'perf_event_open', reduce the error caused by PMU (Performance Monitoring Unit) time multiplexing when calculating CPI.

Ⅱ. Does this pull request fix one issue?

fixes #1470

Ⅲ. Describe how to verify it

By Grafana?

Ⅳ. Special notes for reviews

V. Checklist

  • I have written necessary docs and comments
  • I have added necessary unit tests and integration tests
  • All checks passed in make test

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 24, 2023

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 33.33% and project coverage change: -0.01% ⚠️

Comparison is base (d3ac7f4) 64.12% compared to head (7a6b122) 64.11%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1489      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   64.12%   64.11%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         342      342              
  Lines       35204    35210       +6     
==========================================
+ Hits        22573    22575       +2     
- Misses      10966    10970       +4     
  Partials     1665     1665              
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 64.11% <33.33%> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files Changed Coverage Δ
pkg/koordlet/util/perf/perf_linux.go 46.73% <9.09%> (-3.27%) ⬇️
...lectors/performance/performance_collector_linux.go 56.00% <100.00%> (ø)
pkg/koordlet/util/stat.go 75.00% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@koordinator-bot koordinator-bot bot requested a review from songtao98 July 24, 2023 07:58
Copy link
Member

@jasonliu747 jasonliu747 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@hormes
Copy link
Member

hormes commented Jul 24, 2023

/lgtm

Signed-off-by: bowen-intel <bowen.song@intel.com>
Copy link
Contributor

@songtao98 songtao98 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I found a different computing formula for scalingRatio on kernel Tutorial but this PR's implementation is better for understanding.

@songtao98
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm
/cc @hormes @zwzhang0107

@koordinator-bot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: hormes, songtao98

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@koordinator-bot koordinator-bot bot merged commit 3bcc257 into koordinator-sh:main Jul 25, 2023
15 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[question] Use cycles instead of ref-cycles
4 participants