[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52443ABC.8020808@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 07:46:36 -0600
From: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
CC: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET 0/8] perf tools: Fix scalability problem on callchain
merging (v4)
On 9/26/13 2:58 AM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This is a new version of callchain improvement patchset. I found and
> fixed bugs in the previous version. I verified that it produced
> exactly same output before and after applying rbtree conversion patch
> (#1). However after Frederic's new comm infrastructure patches are
> applied it'd be little different.
>
> The patches are on 'perf/callchain-v4' branch in my tree
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/namhyung/linux-perf.git
>
Given recent breakage, has the patchset been run through any tests on
older kernels that do not support sample_id_all? e.g., 2.6.34 (WRL4).
What about tests with the other perf commands -- script to dump events,
trace on a file with with multiple processes -- to verify no impact on
comm output, especially multithreaded processes with named threads. I
can certainly do those tests in time, but can't guarantee a timeframe
and want to make sure it gets done before merging.
Thanks,
David
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists