From: Ondrej Lichtner olichtne@redhat.com
One more fix for accessing the test duration when parsing test results for cpu utilization of the iperf process.
The json dictionaries are inconsistent between tcp/udp stream on how they report the end of test data - udp reports only a "sum" dictionary, tcp only reports a "sum_sent" and "sum_received" dictionaries. So instead we look at the test start and the *requested* test duration. Not as precise as the actual duration of the test but probably good enough considering how the duration is used in this case...
Signed-off-by: Ondrej Lichtner olichtne@redhat.com --- lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py b/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py index 87ef70f..722b49e 100644 --- a/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py +++ b/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py @@ -187,5 +187,5 @@ def _parse_job_cpu(self, job): else: cpu_percent = job.result["data"]["end"]["cpu_utilization_percent"]["host_total"] job_start = job.result["data"]["start"]["timestamp"]["timesecs"] - duration = job.result["data"]["end"]["sum"]["seconds"] + duration = job.result["data"]["start"]["test_start"]["duration"] return PerfInterval(cpu_percent*duration, duration, "cpu_percent", job_start)
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 09:57:16AM +0100, olichtne@redhat.com wrote:
From: Ondrej Lichtner olichtne@redhat.com
One more fix for accessing the test duration when parsing test results for cpu utilization of the iperf process.
The json dictionaries are inconsistent between tcp/udp stream on how they report the end of test data - udp reports only a "sum" dictionary, tcp only reports a "sum_sent" and "sum_received" dictionaries. So instead we look at the test start and the *requested* test duration. Not as precise as the actual duration of the test but probably good enough considering how the duration is used in this case...
Signed-off-by: Ondrej Lichtner olichtne@redhat.com
lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py b/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py index 87ef70f..722b49e 100644 --- a/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py +++ b/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py @@ -187,5 +187,5 @@ def _parse_job_cpu(self, job): else: cpu_percent = job.result["data"]["end"]["cpu_utilization_percent"]["host_total"] job_start = job.result["data"]["start"]["timestamp"]["timesecs"]
duration = job.result["data"]["end"]["sum"]["seconds"]
duration = job.result["data"]["start"]["test_start"]["duration"] return PerfInterval(cpu_percent*duration, duration, "cpu_percent", job_start)-- 2.30.0
tests confirm that this fix finally works, pushing.
-Ondrej
Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 09:57:16AM CET, olichtne@redhat.com wrote:
From: Ondrej Lichtner olichtne@redhat.com
One more fix for accessing the test duration when parsing test results for cpu utilization of the iperf process.
The json dictionaries are inconsistent between tcp/udp stream on how they report the end of test data - udp reports only a "sum" dictionary, tcp only reports a "sum_sent" and "sum_received" dictionaries. So instead we look at the test start and the *requested* test duration. Not as precise as the actual duration of the test but probably good enough considering how the duration is used in this case...
Signed-off-by: Ondrej Lichtner olichtne@redhat.com
lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py b/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py index 87ef70f..722b49e 100644 --- a/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py +++ b/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py @@ -187,5 +187,5 @@ def _parse_job_cpu(self, job): else: cpu_percent = job.result["data"]["end"]["cpu_utilization_percent"]["host_total"] job_start = job.result["data"]["start"]["timestamp"]["timesecs"]
duration = job.result["data"]["end"]["sum"]["seconds"]
duration = job.result["data"]["start"]["test_start"]["duration"] return PerfInterval(cpu_percent*duration, duration, "cpu_percent", job_start)-- 2.30.0 _______________________________________________ LNST-developers mailing list -- lnst-developers@lists.fedorahosted.org To unsubscribe send an email to lnst-developers-leave@lists.fedorahosted.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/lnst-developers@lists.fedorahos...
Would it make sense to create an issue for iperf to unify this?
-Jan
On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 09:24:08AM +0100, Jan Tluka wrote:
Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 09:57:16AM CET, olichtne@redhat.com wrote:
From: Ondrej Lichtner olichtne@redhat.com
One more fix for accessing the test duration when parsing test results for cpu utilization of the iperf process.
The json dictionaries are inconsistent between tcp/udp stream on how they report the end of test data - udp reports only a "sum" dictionary, tcp only reports a "sum_sent" and "sum_received" dictionaries. So instead we look at the test start and the *requested* test duration. Not as precise as the actual duration of the test but probably good enough considering how the duration is used in this case...
Signed-off-by: Ondrej Lichtner olichtne@redhat.com
lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py b/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py index 87ef70f..722b49e 100644 --- a/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py +++ b/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py @@ -187,5 +187,5 @@ def _parse_job_cpu(self, job): else: cpu_percent = job.result["data"]["end"]["cpu_utilization_percent"]["host_total"] job_start = job.result["data"]["start"]["timestamp"]["timesecs"]
duration = job.result["data"]["end"]["sum"]["seconds"]
duration = job.result["data"]["start"]["test_start"]["duration"] return PerfInterval(cpu_percent*duration, duration, "cpu_percent", job_start)-- 2.30.0 _______________________________________________ LNST-developers mailing list -- lnst-developers@lists.fedorahosted.org To unsubscribe send an email to lnst-developers-leave@lists.fedorahosted.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/lnst-developers@lists.fedorahos...
Would it make sense to create an issue for iperf to unify this?
-Jan
I think this is already reported, or at least discussed in this:
https://github.com/esnet/iperf/issues/584
which is quite an old bug with an explanation that:
It's not on the roadmap right now. Fixing this actually requires a change to the state machine and protocol between the client and server.
We can try to ping it but I wouldn't keep my hopes up...
-Ondrej
Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 09:30:18AM CET, olichtne@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 09:24:08AM +0100, Jan Tluka wrote:
Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 09:57:16AM CET, olichtne@redhat.com wrote:
From: Ondrej Lichtner olichtne@redhat.com
One more fix for accessing the test duration when parsing test results for cpu utilization of the iperf process.
The json dictionaries are inconsistent between tcp/udp stream on how they report the end of test data - udp reports only a "sum" dictionary, tcp only reports a "sum_sent" and "sum_received" dictionaries. So instead we look at the test start and the *requested* test duration. Not as precise as the actual duration of the test but probably good enough considering how the duration is used in this case...
Signed-off-by: Ondrej Lichtner olichtne@redhat.com
lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py b/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py index 87ef70f..722b49e 100644 --- a/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py +++ b/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/IperfFlowMeasurement.py @@ -187,5 +187,5 @@ def _parse_job_cpu(self, job): else: cpu_percent = job.result["data"]["end"]["cpu_utilization_percent"]["host_total"] job_start = job.result["data"]["start"]["timestamp"]["timesecs"]
duration = job.result["data"]["end"]["sum"]["seconds"]
duration = job.result["data"]["start"]["test_start"]["duration"] return PerfInterval(cpu_percent*duration, duration, "cpu_percent", job_start)-- 2.30.0 _______________________________________________ LNST-developers mailing list -- lnst-developers@lists.fedorahosted.org To unsubscribe send an email to lnst-developers-leave@lists.fedorahosted.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/lnst-developers@lists.fedorahos...
Would it make sense to create an issue for iperf to unify this?
-Jan
I think this is already reported, or at least discussed in this:
https://github.com/esnet/iperf/issues/584
which is quite an old bug with an explanation that:
It's not on the roadmap right now. Fixing this actually requires a change to the state machine and protocol between the client and server.
We can try to ping it but I wouldn't keep my hopes up...
-Ondrej
Ok, makes sense.
Thanks for fixing this.
J.
lnst-developers@lists.fedorahosted.org
-
Jan Tluka -
olichtne＠redhat.com -
Ondrej Lichtner