[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87fs26909o.fsf@somnus>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 16:04:19 +0200
From: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
To: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Giovanni Gherdovich <ggherdovich@...e.cz>,
"Gautham R . Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@....com>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...el.com>,
K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 00/25] timer: Move from a push remote at enqueue to a
pull at expiry model
Hi Lukasz,
Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com> writes:
[...]
>
> I have tested this on my 2 Arm boards with mainline kernel
> and almost-mainline. On both platforms it looks stable.
> The results w/ your patchset looks better.
>
Thanks for testing!
[...]
> The performance looks good. Only one test 'Speedometer'
> has some interesting lower score.
Is it required to look into this more detailed or is the regression in a
acceptable range for you?
>
> Fill free to add:
>
> Tested-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
Thanks,
Anna-Maria
Powered by blists - more mailing lists