[LTP] [PATCH] fzsync: limit sampling time
Li Wang
liwan@redhat.com
Sat Dec 1 10:48:56 CET 2018
On Sat, Dec 1, 2018 at 4:58 PM Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 7:09 PM Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Fixes: #429
> > >
> > > Sampling can take considerably longer time on single CPU
> > > and very slow systems. This patch limits sampling time to
> > > 1/2 of fuzzing runtime (0.25 of test time). If we don't
> > > have enough samples by that time, stop sampling and use
> > > stats we gathered so far.
> >
> > This patch makes sense.
> >
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
> > > ---
> > > include/tst_fuzzy_sync.h | 15 +++++++++++++--
> > > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/tst_fuzzy_sync.h b/include/tst_fuzzy_sync.h
> > > index 03f69b78bc82..0ca292c141c3 100644
> > > --- a/include/tst_fuzzy_sync.h
> > > +++ b/include/tst_fuzzy_sync.h
> > > @@ -162,6 +162,7 @@ struct tst_fzsync_pair {
> > > *
> > > * Defaults to 0.5 (~150 seconds with default timeout).
> > > */
> > > + float max_sampling_p;
> > > float exec_time_p;
> > > /** Internal; The test time remaining on tst_fzsync_pair_reset() */
> > > float exec_time_start;
> > > @@ -199,6 +200,7 @@ static void tst_fzsync_pair_init(struct tst_fzsync_pair
> > > *pair)
> > > CHK(avg_alpha, 0, 1, 0.25);
> > > CHK(min_samples, 20, INT_MAX, 1024);
> > > CHK(max_dev_ratio, 0, 1, 0.1);
> > > + CHK(max_sampling_p, 0, 1, 0.25);
> > > CHK(exec_time_p, 0, 1, 0.5);
> > > CHK(exec_loops, 20, INT_MAX, 3000000);
> > > }
> > > @@ -582,9 +584,18 @@ static inline void tst_fzsync_wait_b(struct
> > > tst_fzsync_pair *pair)
> > > static inline int tst_fzsync_run_a(struct tst_fzsync_pair *pair)
> > > {
> > > int exit = 0;
> > > + float rem_p = 1 - tst_timeout_remaining() / pair->exec_time_start;
> > > +
> > > + /* Limit amount of time spent on sampling */
> > > + if ((pair->max_sampling_p < rem_p)
> > > + && (pair->sampling > 0)) {
> > > + tst_res(TINFO, "stopping sampling at %d samples",
> > > + pair->sampling);
> >
> > pair->sampling is the number of samples left, so I think the prints
> > might be more precise if calculate the 'pair->min_samples -
> > pair->sampling'(or pair->exec_loop)?
>
> Yes, I was lazy.
>
> >
> > > + pair->sampling = 0;
> > > + tst_fzsync_pair_info(pair);
> > > + }
> > >
> > > - if (pair->exec_time_p
> > > - < 1 - tst_timeout_remaining() / pair->exec_time_start) {
> > > + if (pair->exec_time_p < rem_p) {
> > > tst_res(TINFO,
> > > "Exceeded execution time, requesting exit");
> > > exit = 1;
> >
> > After involving max_sampling_p, here the warning prints will no longer
> > be useful because it will never get 'pair->sampling > 0' when
> > exec_time_p is exhausted.
>
> You're right, "still sampling" warning can't be reached now.
>
> In my first iteration I had it limited only to single CPU systems,
> so the warning was still possible on SMP.
>
> I'll send v2.
>
> >
> > Base on your patch I suggest that:
> >
> > --- a/include/tst_fuzzy_sync.h
> > +++ b/include/tst_fuzzy_sync.h
> > @@ -590,7 +590,7 @@ static inline int tst_fzsync_run_a(struct
> > tst_fzsync_pair *pair)
> > if ((pair->max_sampling_p < rem_p)
> > && (pair->sampling > 0)) {
> > tst_res(TINFO, "stopping sampling at %d samples",
> > - pair->sampling);
> > + pair->exec_loop);
> > pair->sampling = 0;
> > tst_fzsync_pair_info(pair);
> > }
> > @@ -599,11 +599,6 @@ static inline int tst_fzsync_run_a(struct
> > tst_fzsync_pair *pair)
> > tst_res(TINFO,
> > "Exceeded execution time, requesting exit");
> > exit = 1;
> > -
> > - if (pair->sampling > 0) {
> > - tst_res(TWARN,
> > - "Still sampling, consider increasing
> > LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL");
> > - }
> > }
> >
> > if (++pair->exec_loop > pair->exec_loops) {
> >
> >
> > ======= Snip ========
> >
> > Additionally, If we go this way to limit the sampling time, seems
> > 'pair->min_samples' will become less meaning for fuzzy sync library,
>
> True, but this applies only when sampling goes very slowly.
>
> > because we can just do sampling in a limited time and why we need the
> > minimal samples?
>
> Wouldn't we spend too much time sampling on fast systems
> without much gain?
>
> My impression was we want to get out of sampling phase ASAP,
> so library can start inserting random delays.
>
> Regards,
> Jan
>
> >
> > So what about using limited-time to replace min_samples? Maybe like:
> >
> > --- a/include/tst_fuzzy_sync.h
> > +++ b/include/tst_fuzzy_sync.h
> > @@ -123,19 +123,14 @@ struct tst_fzsync_pair {
> > */
> > int delay;
> > /**
> > - * Internal; The number of samples left or the sampling state.
> > + * Internal; The number of samples in the sampling phase.
> > *
> > - * A positive value is the number of remaining mandatory
> > + * A positive value is the number of past mandatory
> > * samples. Zero or a negative indicate some other state.
> > */
> > int sampling;
> > - /**
> > - * The Minimum number of statistical samples which must be collected.
> > - *
> > - * The minimum number of iterations which must be performed before a
> > - * random delay can be calculated. Defaults to 1024.
> > - */
> > - int min_samples;
> > + /** Internal; Exit sampling phase if this value is 1 */
> > + int sampling_exit;
> > /**
> > * The maximum allowed proportional average deviation.
> > *
> > @@ -198,7 +193,6 @@ struct tst_fzsync_pair {
> > static void tst_fzsync_pair_init(struct tst_fzsync_pair *pair)
> > {
> > CHK(avg_alpha, 0, 1, 0.25);
> > - CHK(min_samples, 20, INT_MAX, 1024);
> > CHK(max_dev_ratio, 0, 1, 0.1);
> > CHK(max_sampling_p, 0, 1, 0.25);
> > CHK(exec_time_p, 0, 1, 0.5);
> > @@ -262,7 +256,8 @@ static void tst_fzsync_pair_reset(struct
> > tst_fzsync_pair *pair,
> > tst_init_stat(&pair->diff_ab);
> > tst_init_stat(&pair->spins_avg);
> > pair->delay = 0;
> > - pair->sampling = pair->min_samples;
> > + pair->sampling = 0;
> > + pair->sampling_exit = 0;
> >
> > pair->exec_loop = 0;
> >
> > @@ -295,7 +290,6 @@ static inline void tst_fzsync_stat_info(struct
> > tst_fzsync_stat stat,
> > */
> > static void tst_fzsync_pair_info(struct tst_fzsync_pair *pair)
> > {
> > - tst_res(TINFO, "loop = %d", pair->exec_loop);
> > tst_fzsync_stat_info(pair->diff_ss, "ns", "start_a - start_b");
> > tst_fzsync_stat_info(pair->diff_sa, "ns", "end_a - start_a");
> > tst_fzsync_stat_info(pair->diff_sb, "ns", "end_b - start_b");
> > @@ -450,6 +444,9 @@ static void tst_fzsync_pair_update(struct
> > tst_fzsync_pair *pair)
> > float alpha = pair->avg_alpha;
> > float per_spin_time, time_delay, dev_ratio;
> >
> > + if (!pair->sampling_exit)
> > + ++pair->sampling;
> > +
> > dev_ratio = (pair->diff_sa.dev_ratio
> > + pair->diff_sb.dev_ratio
> > + pair->diff_ab.dev_ratio
> > @@ -465,11 +462,13 @@ static void tst_fzsync_pair_update(struct
> > tst_fzsync_pair *pair)
> > tst_upd_diff_stat(&pair->diff_ab, alpha,
> > pair->a_end, pair->b_end);
> > tst_upd_stat(&pair->spins_avg, alpha, pair->spins);
> > - if (pair->sampling > 0 && --pair->sampling == 0) {
> > + if (pair->sampling_exit && pair->sampling > 0) {
> > tst_res(TINFO,
> > - "Minimum sampling period ended,
> > deviation ratio = %.2f",
> > - dev_ratio);
> > + "Sampling period ended, total samples = %d,"
> > + "deviation ratio = %.2f",
> > + pair->sampling, dev_ratio);
> > tst_fzsync_pair_info(pair);
> > + pair->sampling = 0;
> > }
> > } else if (fabsf(pair->diff_ab.avg) >= 1 && pair->spins_avg.avg >= 1)
> > {
> > per_spin_time = fabsf(pair->diff_ab.avg) /
> > pair->spins_avg.avg;
> > @@ -587,23 +586,14 @@ static inline int tst_fzsync_run_a(struct
> > tst_fzsync_pair *pair)
> > float rem_p = 1 - tst_timeout_remaining() / pair->exec_time_start;
> >
> > /* Limit amount of time spent on sampling */
> > - if ((pair->max_sampling_p < rem_p)
> > - && (pair->sampling > 0)) {
> > - tst_res(TINFO, "stopping sampling at %d samples",
> > - pair->sampling);
> > - pair->sampling = 0;
> > - tst_fzsync_pair_info(pair);
> > - }
> > + if ((pair->max_sampling_p < rem_p && pair->sampling > 0)
> > + || pair->sampling >= 0.25 * pair->exec_loops)
> > + pair->sampling_exit = 1;
> >
> > if (pair->exec_time_p < rem_p) {
> > tst_res(TINFO,
> > "Exceeded execution time, requesting exit");
> > exit = 1;
> > -
> > - if (pair->sampling > 0) {
> > - tst_res(TWARN,
> > - "Still sampling, consider increasing
> > LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL");
> > - }
> > }
> >
> > if (++pair->exec_loop > pair->exec_loops) {
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Li Wang
> >
--
Regards,
Li Wang
More information about the ltp
mailing list