[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210121203136.GD356537@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 17:31:36 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To: John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
Cc: Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@....com>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com"
<alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
"jolsa@...hat.com" <jolsa@...hat.com>,
"namhyung@...nel.org" <namhyung@...nel.org>,
"irogers@...gle.com" <irogers@...gle.com>,
"kjain@...ux.ibm.com" <kjain@...ux.ibm.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linuxarm@...neuler.org" <linuxarm@...neuler.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf metricgroup: Fix system PMU metrics
Em Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 09:15:54AM +0000, John Garry escreveu:
> On 20/01/2021 05:15, Joakim Zhang wrote:
> > For this patch: Tested-by: Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@....com>
> > Hi John, Jolsa,
> > Is there any way to avoid breaking exist metric expressions? If not, it will always happened after metricgroup changes.
> They are not normally broken like that. Normally we test beforehand, but
> these cases were missed here by me. However if you were testing them
> previously, then it would be expected that you had tested them again for the
> final patchset which was merged.
> Anyway, we can look to add metric tests for these.
> @Arnaldo, I will send separate formal patch for this today.
Hi John, can you please take a look at my tmp.perf/urgent branch and see
if all is well, i.e. the versions of these patches are the ones that
should be merged and that all the patches discussed are there?
For your convenience:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/linux.git/log/?h=tmp.perf/urgent
Thanks,
- Arnaldo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists