linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] perf, x86: Fix event scheduler to solve complex scheduling problems

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 16 Apr 2011 12:14:06 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] perf, x86: Fix event scheduler to solve complex
 scheduling problems


* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 2011-04-16 at 11:43 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > I'd also prefer if we first had actual testcases in 'perf test' for all these 
> > failures - it took an *awfully* long time to find these regressions (the event 
> > scheduler code has been committed for months), while with proper testcases it 
> > would only take a second to run 'perf test'. 
> 
> These cases only exist on AMD F15, I don't think there's many people
> with such systems around.

Well, if the trend continues we'll have more twisted constraints and more bugs 
of this sort, so having a testsuite sure cannot hurt, right?

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/