linux-kernel - Re: perf: regression with PERF_EVENT_IOC

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:	Wed, 25 May 2011 12:39:21 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Vince Weaver <vweaver1@...s.utk.edu>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, fbuihuu@...il.com, paulus@...ba.org,
	acme@...hat.com
Subject: Re: perf: regression with PERF_EVENT_IOC_REFRESH


* Vince Weaver <vweaver1@...s.utk.edu> wrote:

> > suggest moving these usecases into 'perf test' or so - that it 
> > gets run every day:
> 
> you can feel free to install PAPI on your test machines and give it 
> a run daily too.  It's open source

Well, i gave you a suggestion of how to prevent such regressions in 
the future, should you be worried about such regressions.

The standing upstream policy is that while we try to do a good effort 
and obviously fix everything we find ourselves or which gets reported 
to us, we cannot test everything so if you want us to fix bugs you 
need to pick one or more of these options:

 - run our code

 - or help us build better tests, either to 'perf test' (or to LTP)

 - or get your users to test recent upstream kernels for you

 - or ignore us and deal with regressions whenever you get hit by them

Your choice really.

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/