On Apr 10, 2012, at 7:45 PM, Luming Yu wrote:
> The rfc patch reuses some code and idea from jcm's hwlat_detector but
> target for a broader problem that sometime we need to run a simple few minutes
> hardware test to understand if there is any hardware latency as well as
> throughput problem exposed on bare metal or left behind by BIOS or
> interfered by SMI.
Hey thanks. This is totally something I hoped would eventually go upstream,
but I never got around to cleaning it up enough for mass consumption beyond
the use case we had in mind (beating certain folks over the head when they
have "value add" in BIOS code that causes huge SMIs, and the like, for RT).
Did anyone ever get back to you on this one? I never saw any followup. I
will be happy to do some testing and help you get this mainlined.
Jon.
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Jon Masters <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Apr 10, 2012, at 7:45 PM, Luming Yu wrote:
>
>> The rfc patch reuses some code and idea from jcm's hwlat_detector but
>> target for a broader problem that sometime we need to run a simple few minutes
>> hardware test to understand if there is any hardware latency as well as
>> throughput problem exposed on bare metal or left behind by BIOS or
>> interfered by SMI.
>
> Hey thanks. This is totally something I hoped would eventually go upstream,
> but I never got around to cleaning it up enough for mass consumption beyond
> the use case we had in mind (beating certain folks over the head when they
> have "value add" in BIOS code that causes huge SMIs, and the like, for RT).
>
> Did anyone ever get back to you on this one? I never saw any followup. I
> will be happy to do some testing and help you get this mainlined.
So far you are the only one. :-)
If you can find a maintainer for it, and find a way into mainline,
We probably can make it become a popular tool for hardware enabling.
/l