| Message ID | 1446057907-20527-1-git-send-email-stuart.haslam@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 56f510fea3db1e2d7ff7e328d938b0d70fb1a0a5 |
| Headers | show |
ping - needs review. On 28 October 2015 at 18:45, Stuart Haslam <stuart.haslam@linaro.org> wrote: > The results from the initial test run are often worse than would > normally be expected due to there being no warm up phase. As a > simple way to warm up run first test stage twice, ignoring the > results of the first run. > > Signed-off-by: Stuart Haslam <stuart.haslam@linaro.org> > --- > test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c | 12 ++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c b/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c > index efd26dc..38d684a 100644 > --- a/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c > +++ b/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c > @@ -134,6 +134,7 @@ typedef struct { > uint64_t pps_curr; /* Current attempted PPS */ > uint64_t pps_pass; /* Highest passing PPS */ > uint64_t pps_fail; /* Lowest failing PPS */ > + int warmup; /* Warmup stage - ignore results */ > } test_status_t; > > /* Thread specific arguments */ > @@ -647,7 +648,10 @@ static int run_test_single(odp_cpumask_t *thd_mask_tx, > /* wait for receivers */ > odph_linux_pthread_join(&thd_tbl[0], num_rx_workers); > > - return process_results(expected_tx_cnt, status); > + if (!status->warmup) > + return process_results(expected_tx_cnt, status); > + > + return 1; > } > > static int run_test(void) > @@ -659,6 +663,7 @@ static int run_test(void) > .pps_curr = gbl_args->args.pps, > .pps_pass = 0, > .pps_fail = 0, > + .warmup = 1, > }; > > if (setup_txrx_masks(&txmask, &rxmask) != 0) > @@ -679,6 +684,10 @@ static int run_test(void) > printf("%s ", gbl_args->args.ifaces[i]); > printf("\n"); > > + /* first time just run the test but throw away the results */ > + run_test_single(&txmask, &rxmask, &status); > + status.warmup = 0; > + > while (ret > 0) > ret = run_test_single(&txmask, &rxmask, &status); > > @@ -957,7 +966,6 @@ static void parse_args(int argc, char *argv[], test_args_t *args) > LOG_ABORT("Failed to alloc iface storage\n"); > > strcpy(args->if_str, optarg); > - > for (token = strtok(args->if_str, ","); > token != NULL && args->num_ifaces < MAX_NUM_IFACES; > token = strtok(NULL, ",")) > -- > 2.1.1 >
ping^2 On 11 December 2015 at 16:54, Stuart Haslam <stuart.haslam@linaro.org> wrote: > ping - needs review. > > On 28 October 2015 at 18:45, Stuart Haslam <stuart.haslam@linaro.org> wrote: >> The results from the initial test run are often worse than would >> normally be expected due to there being no warm up phase. As a >> simple way to warm up run first test stage twice, ignoring the >> results of the first run. >> >> Signed-off-by: Stuart Haslam <stuart.haslam@linaro.org> >> --- >> test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c | 12 ++++++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c b/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c >> index efd26dc..38d684a 100644 >> --- a/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c >> +++ b/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c >> @@ -134,6 +134,7 @@ typedef struct { >> uint64_t pps_curr; /* Current attempted PPS */ >> uint64_t pps_pass; /* Highest passing PPS */ >> uint64_t pps_fail; /* Lowest failing PPS */ >> + int warmup; /* Warmup stage - ignore results */ >> } test_status_t; >> >> /* Thread specific arguments */ >> @@ -647,7 +648,10 @@ static int run_test_single(odp_cpumask_t *thd_mask_tx, >> /* wait for receivers */ >> odph_linux_pthread_join(&thd_tbl[0], num_rx_workers); >> >> - return process_results(expected_tx_cnt, status); >> + if (!status->warmup) >> + return process_results(expected_tx_cnt, status); >> + >> + return 1; >> } >> >> static int run_test(void) >> @@ -659,6 +663,7 @@ static int run_test(void) >> .pps_curr = gbl_args->args.pps, >> .pps_pass = 0, >> .pps_fail = 0, >> + .warmup = 1, >> }; >> >> if (setup_txrx_masks(&txmask, &rxmask) != 0) >> @@ -679,6 +684,10 @@ static int run_test(void) >> printf("%s ", gbl_args->args.ifaces[i]); >> printf("\n"); >> >> + /* first time just run the test but throw away the results */ >> + run_test_single(&txmask, &rxmask, &status); >> + status.warmup = 0; >> + >> while (ret > 0) >> ret = run_test_single(&txmask, &rxmask, &status); >> >> @@ -957,7 +966,6 @@ static void parse_args(int argc, char *argv[], test_args_t *args) >> LOG_ABORT("Failed to alloc iface storage\n"); >> >> strcpy(args->if_str, optarg); >> - >> for (token = strtok(args->if_str, ","); >> token != NULL && args->num_ifaces < MAX_NUM_IFACES; >> token = strtok(NULL, ",")) >> -- >> 2.1.1 >>
Stuart, please find my run bellow. On my machine warm up did not help: 5773 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 1746 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 1127 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 832 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 2579 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 424 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 1001 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 1652 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 1367 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 1744 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 810 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 2113 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 2910 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 2648 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 1421 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 2548 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 4021 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 2112 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 2085 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 1103 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 474 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 1724 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 1560 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 2552 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 5233 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 741 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 829 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 685 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 1809 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops 698 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops TEST RESULT: 5773 maximum packets per second. On 01/15/2016 18:21, Stuart Haslam wrote: > ping^2 > > On 11 December 2015 at 16:54, Stuart Haslam <stuart.haslam@linaro.org> wrote: >> ping - needs review. >> >> On 28 October 2015 at 18:45, Stuart Haslam <stuart.haslam@linaro.org> wrote: >>> The results from the initial test run are often worse than would >>> normally be expected due to there being no warm up phase. As a >>> simple way to warm up run first test stage twice, ignoring the >>> results of the first run. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Stuart Haslam <stuart.haslam@linaro.org> >>> --- >>> test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c | 12 ++++++++++-- >>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c b/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c >>> index efd26dc..38d684a 100644 >>> --- a/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c >>> +++ b/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c >>> @@ -134,6 +134,7 @@ typedef struct { >>> uint64_t pps_curr; /* Current attempted PPS */ >>> uint64_t pps_pass; /* Highest passing PPS */ >>> uint64_t pps_fail; /* Lowest failing PPS */ >>> + int warmup; /* Warmup stage - ignore results */ >>> } test_status_t; >>> >>> /* Thread specific arguments */ >>> @@ -647,7 +648,10 @@ static int run_test_single(odp_cpumask_t *thd_mask_tx, >>> /* wait for receivers */ >>> odph_linux_pthread_join(&thd_tbl[0], num_rx_workers); >>> >>> - return process_results(expected_tx_cnt, status); >>> + if (!status->warmup) >>> + return process_results(expected_tx_cnt, status); >>> + >>> + return 1; >>> } >>> >>> static int run_test(void) >>> @@ -659,6 +663,7 @@ static int run_test(void) >>> .pps_curr = gbl_args->args.pps, >>> .pps_pass = 0, >>> .pps_fail = 0, >>> + .warmup = 1, >>> }; >>> >>> if (setup_txrx_masks(&txmask, &rxmask) != 0) >>> @@ -679,6 +684,10 @@ static int run_test(void) >>> printf("%s ", gbl_args->args.ifaces[i]); >>> printf("\n"); >>> >>> + /* first time just run the test but throw away the results */ >>> + run_test_single(&txmask, &rxmask, &status); >>> + status.warmup = 0; >>> + >>> while (ret > 0) >>> ret = run_test_single(&txmask, &rxmask, &status); >>> >>> @@ -957,7 +966,6 @@ static void parse_args(int argc, char *argv[], test_args_t *args) >>> LOG_ABORT("Failed to alloc iface storage\n"); >>> >>> strcpy(args->if_str, optarg); >>> - >>> for (token = strtok(args->if_str, ","); >>> token != NULL && args->num_ifaces < MAX_NUM_IFACES; >>> token = strtok(NULL, ",")) >>> -- >>> 2.1.1 >>> > _______________________________________________ > lng-odp mailing list > lng-odp@lists.linaro.org > https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 04:35:21PM +0300, Maxim Uvarov wrote: > Stuart, please find my run bellow. On my machine warm up did not help: > > 5773 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 1746 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 1127 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 832 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 2579 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 424 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 1001 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 1652 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 1367 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 1744 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 810 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 2113 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 2910 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 2648 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 1421 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 2548 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 4021 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 2112 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 2085 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 1103 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 474 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 1724 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 1560 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 2552 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 5233 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 741 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 829 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 685 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 1809 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > 698 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops > TEST RESULT: 5773 maximum packets per second. > Hrm, aren't those results from l2fwd? this patch is a change to odp_pktio_perf. The change isn't really intended to improve performance, just to make results more consistent. You're not likely to notice any difference on machine with non-isolated cores as runs won't be consistent anyway. -- Stuart. > > On 01/15/2016 18:21, Stuart Haslam wrote: > >ping^2 > > > >On 11 December 2015 at 16:54, Stuart Haslam <stuart.haslam@linaro.org> wrote: > >>ping - needs review. > >> > >>On 28 October 2015 at 18:45, Stuart Haslam <stuart.haslam@linaro.org> wrote: > >>>The results from the initial test run are often worse than would > >>>normally be expected due to there being no warm up phase. As a > >>>simple way to warm up run first test stage twice, ignoring the > >>>results of the first run. > >>> > >>>Signed-off-by: Stuart Haslam <stuart.haslam@linaro.org> > >>>--- > >>> test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c | 12 ++++++++++-- > >>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >>> > >>>diff --git a/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c b/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c > >>>index efd26dc..38d684a 100644 > >>>--- a/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c > >>>+++ b/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c > >>>@@ -134,6 +134,7 @@ typedef struct { > >>> uint64_t pps_curr; /* Current attempted PPS */ > >>> uint64_t pps_pass; /* Highest passing PPS */ > >>> uint64_t pps_fail; /* Lowest failing PPS */ > >>>+ int warmup; /* Warmup stage - ignore results */ > >>> } test_status_t; > >>> > >>> /* Thread specific arguments */ > >>>@@ -647,7 +648,10 @@ static int run_test_single(odp_cpumask_t *thd_mask_tx, > >>> /* wait for receivers */ > >>> odph_linux_pthread_join(&thd_tbl[0], num_rx_workers); > >>> > >>>- return process_results(expected_tx_cnt, status); > >>>+ if (!status->warmup) > >>>+ return process_results(expected_tx_cnt, status); > >>>+ > >>>+ return 1; > >>> } > >>> > >>> static int run_test(void) > >>>@@ -659,6 +663,7 @@ static int run_test(void) > >>> .pps_curr = gbl_args->args.pps, > >>> .pps_pass = 0, > >>> .pps_fail = 0, > >>>+ .warmup = 1, > >>> }; > >>> > >>> if (setup_txrx_masks(&txmask, &rxmask) != 0) > >>>@@ -679,6 +684,10 @@ static int run_test(void) > >>> printf("%s ", gbl_args->args.ifaces[i]); > >>> printf("\n"); > >>> > >>>+ /* first time just run the test but throw away the results */ > >>>+ run_test_single(&txmask, &rxmask, &status); > >>>+ status.warmup = 0; > >>>+ > >>> while (ret > 0) > >>> ret = run_test_single(&txmask, &rxmask, &status); > >>> > >>>@@ -957,7 +966,6 @@ static void parse_args(int argc, char *argv[], test_args_t *args) > >>> LOG_ABORT("Failed to alloc iface storage\n"); > >>> > >>> strcpy(args->if_str, optarg); > >>>- > >>> for (token = strtok(args->if_str, ","); > >>> token != NULL && args->num_ifaces < MAX_NUM_IFACES; > >>> token = strtok(NULL, ",")) > >>>-- > >>>2.1.1 > >>>
Merged. I did test on meeting time and looks like cpu load was high. At least now I see speed up improvements. Maxim. On 01/19/2016 21:19, Stuart Haslam wrote: > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 04:35:21PM +0300, Maxim Uvarov wrote: >> Stuart, please find my run bellow. On my machine warm up did not help: >> >> 5773 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 1746 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 1127 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 832 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 2579 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 424 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 1001 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 1652 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 1367 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 1744 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 810 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 2113 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 2910 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 2648 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 1421 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 2548 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 4021 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 2112 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 2085 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 1103 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 474 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 1724 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 1560 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 2552 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 5233 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 741 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 829 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 685 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 1809 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> 698 pps, 5773 max pps, 0 rx drops, 0 tx drops >> TEST RESULT: 5773 maximum packets per second. >> > > Hrm, aren't those results from l2fwd? this patch is a change to > odp_pktio_perf. > > The change isn't really intended to improve performance, just to make > results more consistent. You're not likely to notice any difference on > machine with non-isolated cores as runs won't be consistent anyway. > > -- > Stuart. > >> On 01/15/2016 18:21, Stuart Haslam wrote: >>> ping^2 >>> >>> On 11 December 2015 at 16:54, Stuart Haslam <stuart.haslam@linaro.org> wrote: >>>> ping - needs review. >>>> >>>> On 28 October 2015 at 18:45, Stuart Haslam <stuart.haslam@linaro.org> wrote: >>>>> The results from the initial test run are often worse than would >>>>> normally be expected due to there being no warm up phase. As a >>>>> simple way to warm up run first test stage twice, ignoring the >>>>> results of the first run. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Stuart Haslam <stuart.haslam@linaro.org> >>>>> --- >>>>> test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c | 12 ++++++++++-- >>>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c b/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c >>>>> index efd26dc..38d684a 100644 >>>>> --- a/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c >>>>> +++ b/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c >>>>> @@ -134,6 +134,7 @@ typedef struct { >>>>> uint64_t pps_curr; /* Current attempted PPS */ >>>>> uint64_t pps_pass; /* Highest passing PPS */ >>>>> uint64_t pps_fail; /* Lowest failing PPS */ >>>>> + int warmup; /* Warmup stage - ignore results */ >>>>> } test_status_t; >>>>> >>>>> /* Thread specific arguments */ >>>>> @@ -647,7 +648,10 @@ static int run_test_single(odp_cpumask_t *thd_mask_tx, >>>>> /* wait for receivers */ >>>>> odph_linux_pthread_join(&thd_tbl[0], num_rx_workers); >>>>> >>>>> - return process_results(expected_tx_cnt, status); >>>>> + if (!status->warmup) >>>>> + return process_results(expected_tx_cnt, status); >>>>> + >>>>> + return 1; >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> static int run_test(void) >>>>> @@ -659,6 +663,7 @@ static int run_test(void) >>>>> .pps_curr = gbl_args->args.pps, >>>>> .pps_pass = 0, >>>>> .pps_fail = 0, >>>>> + .warmup = 1, >>>>> }; >>>>> >>>>> if (setup_txrx_masks(&txmask, &rxmask) != 0) >>>>> @@ -679,6 +684,10 @@ static int run_test(void) >>>>> printf("%s ", gbl_args->args.ifaces[i]); >>>>> printf("\n"); >>>>> >>>>> + /* first time just run the test but throw away the results */ >>>>> + run_test_single(&txmask, &rxmask, &status); >>>>> + status.warmup = 0; >>>>> + >>>>> while (ret > 0) >>>>> ret = run_test_single(&txmask, &rxmask, &status); >>>>> >>>>> @@ -957,7 +966,6 @@ static void parse_args(int argc, char *argv[], test_args_t *args) >>>>> LOG_ABORT("Failed to alloc iface storage\n"); >>>>> >>>>> strcpy(args->if_str, optarg); >>>>> - >>>>> for (token = strtok(args->if_str, ","); >>>>> token != NULL && args->num_ifaces < MAX_NUM_IFACES; >>>>> token = strtok(NULL, ",")) >>>>> -- >>>>> 2.1.1 >>>>>
diff --git a/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c b/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c index efd26dc..38d684a 100644 --- a/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c +++ b/test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c @@ -134,6 +134,7 @@ typedef struct { uint64_t pps_curr; /* Current attempted PPS */ uint64_t pps_pass; /* Highest passing PPS */ uint64_t pps_fail; /* Lowest failing PPS */ + int warmup; /* Warmup stage - ignore results */ } test_status_t; /* Thread specific arguments */ @@ -647,7 +648,10 @@ static int run_test_single(odp_cpumask_t *thd_mask_tx, /* wait for receivers */ odph_linux_pthread_join(&thd_tbl[0], num_rx_workers); - return process_results(expected_tx_cnt, status); + if (!status->warmup) + return process_results(expected_tx_cnt, status); + + return 1; } static int run_test(void) @@ -659,6 +663,7 @@ static int run_test(void) .pps_curr = gbl_args->args.pps, .pps_pass = 0, .pps_fail = 0, + .warmup = 1, }; if (setup_txrx_masks(&txmask, &rxmask) != 0) @@ -679,6 +684,10 @@ static int run_test(void) printf("%s ", gbl_args->args.ifaces[i]); printf("\n"); + /* first time just run the test but throw away the results */ + run_test_single(&txmask, &rxmask, &status); + status.warmup = 0; + while (ret > 0) ret = run_test_single(&txmask, &rxmask, &status); @@ -957,7 +966,6 @@ static void parse_args(int argc, char *argv[], test_args_t *args) LOG_ABORT("Failed to alloc iface storage\n"); strcpy(args->if_str, optarg); - for (token = strtok(args->if_str, ","); token != NULL && args->num_ifaces < MAX_NUM_IFACES; token = strtok(NULL, ","))
The results from the initial test run are often worse than would normally be expected due to there being no warm up phase. As a simple way to warm up run first test stage twice, ignoring the results of the first run. Signed-off-by: Stuart Haslam <stuart.haslam@linaro.org> --- test/performance/odp_pktio_perf.c | 12 ++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)