[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1707151033130.29924@macbook-air>
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2017 10:37:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
cc: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...il.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: perf: bisected sampling bug in Linux 4.11-rc1
On Sat, 15 Jul 2017, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu> wrote:
>
> > 487f05e18aa4efacee6357480f293a5afe6593b5 is the first bad commit
> >
> > commit 487f05e18aa4efacee6357480f293a5afe6593b5
> > Author: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
> > Date: Thu Jan 19 18:43:30 2017 +0200
> >
> > perf/core: Optimize event rescheduling on active contexts
>
> BTW., just to prepare for the eventuality: below is a (completely untested...)
> revert of this commit, against recent kernels, with conflicts fixed up.
>
> Does this fix your testcase?
Yes, applying this to current git fixes the testcase and doesn't seem to
break anything else.
Although there is a separate issue also introduced in 4.11-rc1 that still
fails a different testcase. I'm in the middle of bisecting that one and
probably won't have the result of the bisect until Monday.
Vince
Powered by blists - more mailing lists