On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 05:22:50PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 05/17/2017 11:19 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Marek Polacek <pola...@redhat.com> writes:
> >
> > > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 09:13:40AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> > > > On 05/17/2017 04:23 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > > > > Hi folks.
> > > > >
> > > > > I've been having troubles comparing the results of different test runs
> > > > > for quite some time, and have finally decided to whine about it.
> > > > > Perhaps
> > > > > someone can point out to whatever I may be doing wrong.
> > > > >
> > > > > I generally do "make check -k -j60" on two different trees and compare
> > > > Make sure you've got Andi's patch installed and report back. It's
> > > > supposed to help with smaller -j loads, but it's unclear if it's enough
> > > > to address the problems with higher loads like you're using.
> > >
> > > I'm still seeing spurious tree-prof failures there (with -j48).
> >
> > Do they go away if you run first (as root)
> >
> > echo 5000 > /proc/sys/kernel/perf_event_mlock_kb
> >
> > first?
>
> I tried three runs of the profiling tests and the failures did
> clear up with the increased setting.
I tried setting that but I still saw a very small number of tree-prof failures,
at least in one of the runs. But it did help - thanks.
Marek
