[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200629191700.GC3031756@krava>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 21:17:00 +0200
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 01/13] tools/libperf: avoid moving of fds at
fdarray__filter() call
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 06:11:52PM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote:
SNIP
> >>
> >> I'm confused, are you talking about file descriptors limit now?
> >> this wont be affected by epoll change.. what do I miss?
> >
> > Currently there is already uname -n limit on the amount of open file descriptors
> > and Perf tool process is affected by that limit.
> >
> > Moving to epoll() will impose one more max_user_watches limit and that can additionally
> > confine Perf applicability even though default value on some machines currently
> > is high enough.
>
> Prior making v9 I would prefer to agree on some design to be implemented in order to
> avoid guessing and redundant reiterating.
>
> Options that I see as good balanced ones are 1) or 5), + non screwing of fds to fix
> staleness of pos(=fdarray__add()).
>
> Are there any thoughts so far?
let's try it and discuss over the code
jirka
Powered by blists - more mailing lists