From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: John Levon <levon@movementarian.org>
Cc: oprofile-list@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jbarnes@sgi.com, anton@samba.org,
phil.el@wanadoo.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH] improve OProfile on many-way systems
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 21:41:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040821214141.70eb4b9a.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040821235556.GA22619@compsoc.man.ac.uk>
John Levon <levon@movementarian.org> wrote:
>
> For example a while ago wli walked right into an obvious bug on one of
> his machines that hadn't shown up during /any/ of my testing since the
> code was merged.
wli is a self-contained corner case.
> > One of my mental checkpoints before sending a patch to Linus is "has this
> > been sufficiently tested". I don't know how to answer that in this case.
>
> Me neither. It would certainly be great to have a decent regression test
> suite for OProfile, but I don't have one other than the usual by-hand
> testing I do. Isn't there some STP thing or something at OSDL we can
> get people to try?
LTP would be appropriate. If it is possible to come up with a suitably
encapsulated testcase I'm sure they'd take (and integrate) the code.
> > In fact I don't know how to answer that in a _lot_ of cases, but if I know
> > that people are using the feature in anger and we're sufficiently early in
> > the 2.6.x cycle then I'll assume that regressions will be picked up.
>
> I must admit I'm still not clear on when the equivalent of "early in the
> 2.6.x cycle" is going to happen again...
Well, we've just released 2.6.8, so the answer to your question is "right
now".
It seems that the release cycle has stretched from ~4 weeks out to ~6
weeks or more. But some of that increase could be due to summer and OLS.
> I have no idea when, if ever,
> call-graph OProfile would be suitable to merge.
As soon as it's ready.
Seriously, don't let hypothetical kernel bureaucracy hold you back - write
the code, get it into -mm. I'll look after it for as long as we think is
appropriate, then it goes in. As long as it doesn't break existing stuff.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-08-22 4:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-21 19:26 John Levon
2004-08-21 20:58 ` Andrew Morton
2004-08-21 22:06 ` Jesse Barnes
2004-08-21 23:14 ` John Levon
2004-08-22 4:34 ` Anton Blanchard
2004-08-24 0:07 ` John Levon
2004-08-21 23:22 ` John Levon
2004-08-21 23:36 ` Andrew Morton
2004-08-21 23:55 ` John Levon
2004-08-22 4:41 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2004-08-22 22:42 ` John Levon
2004-08-22 3:50 ` Anton Blanchard
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040821214141.70eb4b9a.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=jbarnes@sgi.com \
--cc=levon@movementarian.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oprofile-list@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=phil.el@wanadoo.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome