Trending: Prepare static content for the new UTI

- Chapter "jenkins jobs": deleted, the neccesary information is in
  "Performance Tests".
- Chapter "perpatch_performance_tests": deleted, should be somewhere
  else.
- Chapter "testbed_hw_configuration": no information was there for years.
- Chapter "performance_tests": deleted.
- Other chapters: Edited, updated, simplyfied.

Change-Id: I04dffffea1200a9bf792458022ce868021c94745
Signed-off-by: Tibor Frank <tifrank@cisco.com>

8 files changed, 30 insertions, 450 deletions

diff --git a/docs/cpta/methodology/index.rst b/docs/cpta/methodology/index.rst
index cbcfcb50cb..9105ec46b4 100644
--- a/docs/cpta/methodology/index.rst
+++ b/docs/cpta/methodology/index.rst
@@ -1,14 +1,8 @@
-.. _trending_methodology:
-
 Trending Methodology
 ====================
 
 .. toctree::
 
     overview
-    performance_tests
     trend_analysis
     trend_presentation
-    jenkins_jobs
-    testbed_hw_configuration
-    perpatch_performance_tests
diff --git a/docs/cpta/methodology/jenkins_jobs.rst b/docs/cpta/methodology/jenkins_jobs.rst
deleted file mode 100644
index a58d616ff9..0000000000
--- a/docs/cpta/methodology/jenkins_jobs.rst
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,62 +0,0 @@
-Jenkins Jobs
-------------
-
-Performance Trending (PT)
-`````````````````````````
-
-CSIT PT runs regular performance test jobs measuring and collecting MRR
-data per test case. PT is designed as follows:
-
-1. PT job triggers:
-
-   a) Periodic e.g. twice a day.
-   b) On-demand gerrit triggered.
-
-2. Measurements and data calculations per test case:
-
-  a) Max Received Rate (MRR) - for each trial measurement,
-     send packets at link rate for trial duration,
-     count total received packets, divide by trial duration.
-
-3. Archive MRR values per test case.
-4. Archive all counters collected at MRR.
-
-Performance Analysis (PA)
-`````````````````````````
-
-CSIT PA runs performance analysis
-including anomaly detection as described above.
-PA is defined as follows:
-
-1. PA job triggers:
-
-   a) By PT jobs at their completion.
-   b) On-demand gerrit triggered.
-
-2. Download and parse archived historical data and the new data:
-
-   a) Download RF output.xml files from latest PT job and compressed
-      archived data from nexus.
-   b) Parse out the data filtering test cases listed in PA specification
-      (part of CSIT PAL specification file).
-
-3. Re-calculate new groups and their averages.
-
-4. Evaluate new test data:
-
-   a) If the existing group is prolonged => Result = Pass,
-      Reason = Normal.
-   b) If a new group is detected with lower average =>
-      Result = Fail, Reason = Regression.
-   c) If a new group is detected with higher average =>
-      Result = Pass, Reason = Progression.
-
-5. Generate and publish results
-
-   a) Relay evaluation result to job result.
-   b) Generate a new set of trend summary dashboard, list of failed
-      tests and graphs.
-   c) Publish trend dashboard and graphs in html format on
-      `S3 Docs <https://s3-docs.fd.io/>`_.
-   d) Generate an alerting email. This email is sent by Jenkins to
-      `CSIT Report distribution list <csit-report@lists.fd.io>`_.
diff --git a/docs/cpta/methodology/overview.rst b/docs/cpta/methodology/overview.rst
index ecea051116..d2ffc04407 100644
--- a/docs/cpta/methodology/overview.rst
+++ b/docs/cpta/methodology/overview.rst
@@ -1,14 +1,6 @@
 Overview
---------
+^^^^^^^^
 
 This document describes a high-level design of a system for continuous
 performance measuring, trending and change detection for FD.io VPP SW
 data plane (and other performance tests run within CSIT sub-project).
-
-There is a Performance Trending (PT) CSIT module, and a separate
-Performance Analysis (PA) module ingesting results from PT and
-analysing, detecting and reporting any performance anomalies using
-historical data and statistical metrics. PA does also produce
-trending dashboard, list of failed tests and graphs with summary and
-drill-down views across all specified tests that can be reviewed and
-inspected regularly by FD.io developers and users community.
diff --git a/docs/cpta/methodology/performance_tests.rst b/docs/cpta/methodology/performance_tests.rst
deleted file mode 100644
index 82e64f870a..0000000000
--- a/docs/cpta/methodology/performance_tests.rst
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
-Performance Tests
------------------
-
-Performance trending relies on Maximum Receive Rate (MRR) tests.
-MRR tests measure the packet forwarding rate, in multiple trials of set
-duration, under the maximum load offered by traffic generator
-regardless of packet loss. Maximum load for specified Ethernet frame
-size is set to the bi-directional link rate.
-
-Current parameters for performance trending MRR tests:
-
-- **Ethernet frame sizes**: 64B (78B for IPv6 tests) for all tests, IMIX for
-  selected tests (vhost, memif); all quoted sizes include frame CRC, but
-  exclude per frame transmission overhead of 20B (preamble, inter frame
-  gap).
-- **Maximum load offered**: 10GE and 40GE link (sub-)rates depending on NIC
-  tested, with the actual packet rate depending on frame size,
-  transmission overhead and traffic generator NIC forwarding capacity.
-
-  - For 10GE NICs the maximum packet rate load is 2* 14.88 Mpps for 64B,
-    a 10GE bi-directional link rate.
-  - For 40GE NICs the maximum packet rate load is 2* 18.75 Mpps for 64B,
-    a 40GE bi-directional link sub-rate limited by the packet forwarding
-    capacity of 2-port 40GE NIC model (XL710) used on T-Rex Traffic
-    Generator.
-
-- **Trial duration**: 1 sec.
-- **Number of trials per test**: 10.
-- **Test execution frequency**: twice a day, every 12 hrs (02:00,
-  14:00 UTC).
-
-Note: MRR tests should be reporting bi-directional link rate (or NIC
-rate, if lower) if tested VPP configuration can handle the packet rate
-higher than bi-directional link rate, e.g. large packet tests and/or
-multi-core tests. In other words MRR = min(VPP rate, bi-dir link rate,
-NIC rate).
diff --git a/docs/cpta/methodology/perpatch_performance_tests.rst b/docs/cpta/methodology/perpatch_performance_tests.rst
deleted file mode 100644
index a72926f2c6..0000000000
--- a/docs/cpta/methodology/perpatch_performance_tests.rst
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,242 +0,0 @@
-Per-patch performance tests
----------------------------
-
-Updated for CSIT git commit id: 72b45cfe662107c8e1bb549df71ba51352a898ee.
-
-A methodology similar to trending analysis is used for comparing performance
-before a DUT code change is merged. This can act as a verify job to disallow
-changes which would decrease performance without a good reason.
-
-Existing jobs
-`````````````
-
-VPP is the only project currently using such jobs.
-They are not started automatically, must be triggered on demand.
-They allow full tag expressions, but some tags are enforced (such as MRR).
-
-There are jobs available for multiple types of testbeds,
-based on various processors.
-Their Gerrit triggers words are of the form "perftest-{node_arch}"
-where the node_arch combinations currently supported are:
-2n-clx, 2n-dnv, 2n-skx, 2n-tx2, 2n-zn2, 3n-dnv, 3n-skx, 3n-tsh.
-
-Test selection
---------------
-
-..
-    TODO: Majority of this section is also useful for CSIT verify jobs. Move it somewhere.
-
-Gerrit trigger line without any additional arguments selects
-a small set of test cases to run.
-If additional arguments are added to the Gerrit trigger, they are treated
-as Robot tag expressions to select tests to run.
-While very flexible, this method of test selection also allows the user
-to accidentally select too high number of tests, blocking the testbed for days.
-
-What follows is a list of explanations and recommendations
-to help users to select the minimal set of tests cases.
-
-Verify cycles
-_____________
-
-When Gerrit schedules multiple jobs to run for the same patch set,
-it waits until all runs are complete.
-While it is waiting, it is possible to trigger more jobs
-(adding runs to the set Gerrit is waiting for), but it is not possible
-to trigger more runs for the same job, until Gerrit is done waiting.
-After Gerrit is done waiting, it becames possible to trigger
-the same job again.
-
-Example. User triggers one set of tests on 2n-skx and immediately
-also triggers other set of tests on 3n-skx. Then the user notices
-2n-skx run end early because of a typo in tag expression.
-When the user tries to re-trigger 2n-skx (with fixed tag expression),
-that comment gets ignored by Jenkins.
-Only when 3n-skx job finishes, the user can trigger 2n-skx.
-
-One comment many jobs
-_____________________
-
-In the past, the CSIT code which parses for perftest trigger comments
-was buggy, which lead to bad behavior (as in selection all performance test,
-because "perftest" is also a robot tag) when user included multiple
-perftest trigger words in the same comment.
-
-The worst bugs were fixed since then, but it is still recommended
-to use just one trigger word per Gerrit comment, just to be safe.
-
-Multiple test cases in run
-__________________________
-
-While Robot supports OR operator, it does not support parentheses,
-so the OR operator is not very useful. It is recommended
-to use space instead of OR operator.
-
-Example template:
-perftest-2n-skx {tag_expression_1} {tag_expression_2}
-
-See below for more concrete examples.
-
-Suite tags
-__________
-
-Traditionally, CSIT maintains broad Robot tags that can be used to select tests,
-for details on existing tags, see
-`CSIT Tags <https://github.com/FDio/csit/blob/master/docs/tag_documentation.rst>`_.
-
-But it is not recommended to use them for test selection,
-as it is not that easy to determine how many test cases are selected.
-
-The recommended way is to look into CSIT repository first,
-and locate a specific suite the user is interested in,
-and use its suite tag. For example, "ethip4-ip4base" is a suite tag
-selecting just one suite in CSIT git repository,
-avoiding all scale, container, and other simialr variants.
-
-Note that CSIT uses "autogen" code generator,
-so the robot running in Jenkins has access to more suites
-than visible just by looking into CSIT git repository,
-so suite tag is not enough to select even the intended suite,
-and user still probably wants to narrow down
-to a single test case within a suite.
-
-Fully specified tag expressions
-_______________________________
-
-Here is one template to select a single test case:
-{test_type}AND{nic_model}AND{nic_driver}AND{cores}AND{frame_size}AND{suite_tag}
-where the variables are all lower case (so AND operator stands out).
-
-Currently only one test type is supported by the performance comparison jobs:
-"mrr".
-The nic_driver options depend on nic_model. For Intel cards "drv_avf" (AVF plugin)
-and "drv_vfio_pci" (DPDK plugin) are popular, for Mellanox "drv_rdma_core".
-Currently, the performance using "drv_af_xdp" is not reliable enough, so do not use it
-unless you are specifically testing for AF_XDP.
-
-The most popular nic_model is "nic_intel-xxv710", but that is not available
-on all testbed types.
-It is safe to use "1c" for cores (unless you are suspection multi-core performance
-is affected differently) and "64b" for frame size ("78b" for ip6
-and more for dot1q and other encapsulated traffic;
-"1518b" is popular for ipsec and other payload-bound tests).
-
-As there are more test cases than CSIT can periodically test,
-it is possible to encounter an old test case that currently fails.
-To avoid that, you can look at "job spec" files we use for periodic testing,
-for example `this one <https://github.com/FDio/csit/blob/master/docs/job_specs/report_iterative/2n-skx/vpp-mrr-00.md>`_.
-
-..
-    TODO: Explain why "periodic" job spec link lands at report_iterative.
-
-Shortening triggers
-___________________
-
-Advanced users may use the following tricks to avoid writing long trigger comments.
-
-Robot supports glob matching, which can be used to select multiple suite tags at once.
-
-Not specifying one of 6 parts of the recommended expression pattern
-will select all available options. For example not specifying nic_driver
-for nic_intel-xxv710 will select all 3 applicable drivers.
-You can use NOT operator to reject some options (e.g. NOTdrv_af_xdp),
-but beware, with NOT the order matters:
-tag1ANDtag2NOTtag3 is not the same as tag1NOTtag3ANDtag2,
-the latter is evaluated as tag1AND(NOT(tag3ANDtag2)).
-
-Beware when not specifying nic_model. As a precaution,
-CSIT code will insert the defailt NIC model for the tetsbed used.
-Example: Specifying drv_rdma_core without specifying nic_model
-will fail, as the default nic_model is nic_intel-xxv710
-which does not support RDMA core driver.
-
-Complete example
-________________
-
-A user wants to test a VPP change which may affect load balance whith bonding.
-Searching tag documentation for "bonding" finds LBOND tag and its variants.
-Searching CSIT git repository (directory tests/) finds 8 suite files,
-all suited only for 3-node testbeds.
-All suites are using vhost, but differ by the forwarding app inside VM
-(DPDK or VPP), by the forwarding mode of VPP acting as host level vswitch
-(MAC learning or cross connect), and by the number of DUT1-DUT2 links
-available (1 or 2).
-
-As not all NICs and testbeds offer enogh ports for 2 parallel DUT-DUT links,
-the user looks at `testbed specifications <https://github.com/FDio/csit/tree/master/topologies/available>`_
-and finds that only x710 NIC on 3n-skx testbed matches the requirements.
-Quick look into the suites confirm the smallest frame size is 64 bytes
-(despite DOT1Q robot tag, as the encapsulation does not happen on TG-DUT links).
-It is ok to use just 1 physical core, as 3n-skx has hyperthreading enabled,
-so VPP vswitch will use 2 worker threads.
-
-The user decides the vswitch forwarding mode is not important
-(so choses cross connect as that has less CPU overhead),
-but wants to test both NIC drivers (not AF_XDP), both apps in VM,
-and both 1 and 2 parallel links.
-
-After shortening, this is the trigger comment fianlly used:
-perftest-3n-skx mrrANDnic_intel-x710AND1cAND64bAND?lbvpplacp-dot1q-l2xcbase-eth-2vhostvr1024-1vm*NOTdrv_af_xdp
-
-Basic operation
-```````````````
-
-The job builds VPP .deb packages for both the patch under test
-(called "current") and its parent patch (called "parent").
-
-For each test (from a set defined by tag expression),
-both builds are subjected to several trial measurements (BMRR).
-Measured samples are grouped to "parent" sequence,
-followed by "current" sequence. The same Minimal Description Length
-algorithm as in trending is used to decide whether it is one big group,
-or two smaller gropus. If it is one group, a "normal" result
-is declared for the test. If it is two groups, and current average
-is less then parent average, the test is declared a regression.
-If it is two groups and current average is larger or equal,
-the test is declared a progression.
-
-The whole job fails (giving -1) if some trial measurement failed,
-or if any test was declared a regression.
-
-Temporary specifics
-```````````````````
-
-The Minimal Description Length analysis is performed by
-CSIT code equivalent to jumpavg-0.1.3 library available on PyPI.
-
-In hopes of strengthening of signal (code performance) compared to noise
-(all other factors influencing the measured values), several workarounds
-are applied.
-
-In contrast to trending, trial duration is set to 10 seconds,
-and only 5 samples are measured for each build.
-Both parameters are set in ci-management.
-
-This decreases sensitivity to regressions, but also decreases
-probability of false positives.
-
-Console output
-``````````````
-
-The following information as visible towards the end of Jenkins console output,
-repeated for each analyzed test.
-
-The original 5 values are visible in order they were measured.
-The 5 values after processing are also visible in output,
-this time sorted by value (so people can see minimum and maximum).
-
-The next output is difference of averages. It is the current average
-minus the parent average, expressed as percentage of the parent average.
-
-The next three outputs contain the jumpavg representation
-of the two groups and a combined group.
-Here, "bits" is the description length; for "current" sequence
-it includes effect from "parent" average value
-(jumpavg-0.1.3 penalizes sequences with too close averages).
-
-Next, a sentence describing which grouping description is shorter,
-and by how much bits.
-Finally, the test result classification is visible.
-
-The algorithm does not track test case names,
-so test cases are indexed (from 0).
diff --git a/docs/cpta/methodology/testbed_hw_configuration.rst b/docs/cpta/methodology/testbed_hw_configuration.rst
deleted file mode 100644
index 7f6556c968..0000000000
--- a/docs/cpta/methodology/testbed_hw_configuration.rst
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,5 +0,0 @@
-Testbed HW configuration
-------------------------
-
-The testbed HW configuration is described on
-`CSIT/Testbeds: Xeon Hsw, VIRL FD.IO wiki page <https://wiki.fd.io/view/CSIT/Testbeds:_Xeon_Hsw,_VIRL.>`_.
diff --git a/docs/cpta/methodology/trend_analysis.rst b/docs/cpta/methodology/trend_analysis.rst
index 5a48136c9b..2bb54997b0 100644
--- a/docs/cpta/methodology/trend_analysis.rst
+++ b/docs/cpta/methodology/trend_analysis.rst
@@ -11,65 +11,12 @@ is called a trend for the group.
 All the analysis is based on finding the right partition into groups
 and comparing their trends.
 
-Trend Compliance
-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
-.. _Trend_Compliance:
-
-Trend compliance metrics are targeted to provide an indication of trend
-changes, and hint at their reliability (see Common Patterns below).
-
-There is a difference between compliance metric names used in this document,
-and column names used in :ref:`Dashboard` tables and Alerting emails.
-In cases of low user confusion risk, column names are shortened,
-e.g. Trend instead of Last Trend.
-In cases of high user confusion risk, column names are prolonged,
-e.g. Long-Term Change instead of Trend Change.
-(This document refers to a generic "trend",
-so the compliance metric name is prolonged to Last Trend to avoid confusion.)
-
-The definition of Reference for Trend Change is perhaps surprising.
-It was chosen to allow both positive difference on progression
-(if within last week), but also negative difference on progression
-(if performance was even better somewhere between 3 months and 1 week ago).
-
-In the table below, "trend at time <t>", shorthand "trend[t]"
-means "the group average of the group the sample at time <t> belongs to".
-Here, time is usually given as "last" or last with an offset,
-e.g. "last - 1week".
-Also, "runs[t]" is a shorthand for "number of samples in the group
-the sample at time <t> belongs to".
-
-The definitions of compliance metrics:
-
-+-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+-------------+-----------------------------------------------+
-| Compliance Metric | Legend Short Name | Formula                         | Value       | Reference                                     |
-+===================+===================+=================================+=============+===============================================+
-| Last Trend        | Trend             | trend[last]                     |             |                                               |
-+-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+-------------+-----------------------------------------------+
-| Number of runs    | Runs              | runs[last]                      |             |                                               |
-+-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+-------------+-----------------------------------------------+
-| Trend Change      | Long-Term Change  | (Value - Reference) / Reference | trend[last] | max(trend[last - 3mths]..trend[last - 1week]) |
-+-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+-------------+-----------------------------------------------+
-
-Caveats
--------
-
-Obviously, if the result history is too short, the true Trend[t] value
-may not by available. We use the earliest Trend available instead.
-
-The current implementation does not track time of the samples,
-it counts runs instead.
-For "- 1week" we use "10 runs ago, 5 runs for topo-arch with 1 TB",
-for "- 3mths" we use "180 days or 180 runs ago, whatever comes first".
-
 Anomalies in graphs
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
-In graphs, the start of the following group is marked
-as a regression (red circle) or progression (green circle),
-if the new trend is lower (or higher respectively)
-then the previous group's.
+In graphs, the start of the following group is marked as a regression (red
+circle) or progression (green circle), if the new trend is lower (or higher
+respectively) then the previous group's.
 
 Implementation details
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
@@ -77,18 +24,17 @@ Implementation details
 Partitioning into groups
 ------------------------
 
-While sometimes the samples within a group are far from being
-distributed normally, currently we do not have a better tractable model.
+While sometimes the samples within a group are far from being distributed
+normally, currently we do not have a better tractable model.
 
-Here, "sample" should be the result of single trial measurement,
-with group boundaries set only at test run granularity.
-But in order to avoid detecting causes unrelated to VPP performance,
-the current presentation takes average of all trials
-within the run as the sample.
-Effectively, this acts as a single trial with aggregate duration.
+Here, "sample" should be the result of single trial measurement, with group
+boundaries set only at test run granularity. But in order to avoid detecting
+causes unrelated to VPP performance, the current presentation takes average of
+all trials within the run as the sample. Effectively, this acts as a single
+trial with aggregate duration.
 
-Performance graphs show the run average as a dot
-(not all individual trial results).
+Performance graphs show the run average as a dot (not all individual trial
+results).
 
 The group boundaries are selected based on `Minimum Description Length`_.
 
diff --git a/docs/cpta/methodology/trend_presentation.rst b/docs/cpta/methodology/trend_presentation.rst
index e9918020c5..67d0d3c45a 100644
--- a/docs/cpta/methodology/trend_presentation.rst
+++ b/docs/cpta/methodology/trend_presentation.rst
@@ -1,35 +1,28 @@
 Trend Presentation
-------------------
-
-Performance Dashboard
-`````````````````````
-
-Dashboard tables list a summary of per test-case VPP MRR performance
-trend and trend compliance metrics and detected number of anomalies.
-
-Separate tables are generated for each testbed and each tested number of
-physical cores for VPP workers (1c, 2c, 4c). Test case names are linked to
-respective trending graphs for ease of navigation through the test data.
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 
 Failed tests
-````````````
+~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+The Failed tests tables list the tests which failed during the last test run.
+Separate tables are generated for each testbed.
 
-The Failed tests tables list the tests which failed over the specified seven-
-day period together with the number of fails over the period and last failure
-details - Time, VPP-Build-Id and CSIT-Job-Build-Id.
+Regressions and progressions
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 
-Separate tables are generated for each testbed. Test case names are linked to
-respective trending graphs for ease of navigation through the test data.
+These tables list tests which encountered a regression or progression during the
+specified time period, which is currently set to the last 21 days.
 
 Trendline Graphs
-````````````````
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
-Trendline graphs show measured per run averages of MRR values,
-group average values, and detected anomalies.
+Trendline graphs show measured per run averages of MRR values, NDR or PDR
+values, group average values, and detected anomalies.
 The graphs are constructed as follows:
 
 - X-axis represents the date in the format MMDD.
-- Y-axis represents run-average MRR value in Mpps.
+- Y-axis represents run-average MRR value, NDR or PDR values in Mpps. For PDR
+  tests also a graph with average latency at 50% PDR [us] is generated.
 - Markers to indicate anomaly classification:
 
   - Regression - red circle.
@@ -37,6 +30,6 @@ The graphs are constructed as follows:
 
 - The line shows average MRR value of each group.
 
-In addition the graphs show dynamic labels while hovering over graph
-data points, presenting the CSIT build date, measured MRR value, VPP
-reference, trend job build ID and the LF testbed ID.
+In addition the graphs show dynamic labels while hovering over graph data
+points, presenting the CSIT build date, measured value, VPP reference, trend job
+build ID and the LF testbed ID.