On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 09:24:08AM +0100, Jan Tluka wrote:
Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 09:57:16AM CET, olichtne(a)redhat.com wrote:
>From: Ondrej Lichtner <olichtne(a)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(a)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(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>To unsubscribe send an email to lnst-developers-leave(a)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.fedora...
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