On 24/07/2014 5:19 p.m., Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
David, can I have your Acked-by for just those two while the rest is debated?
Adrian, can I have yours as well?
Yes you have my Ack for patches 1 and 17
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the b
On 7/24/14, 9:10 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
I haven't seen this comment, just saw David, IIUC, having problems using
the whole patchkit, David?
The testing I did with the whole patchkit saw no behavior differences.
My tests were more to counter what he said, i.e. that:
No overloa
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 12:10:09PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
SNIP
> >
> > should be good to go..
> >
> > Namhyung pointed out performance implications for patch 17:
> > perf tools: Always force PERF_RECORD_FINISHED_ROUND event
>
> I haven't seen this comment, just saw David, IIU
Em Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 04:56:11PM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 11:19:58AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:36:54PM -0600, David Ahern escreveu:
> > > On 7/21/14, 12:23 PM, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> > > >On 21/07/2014 7:31 p.m., Andi Kleen w
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 11:19:58AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:36:54PM -0600, David Ahern escreveu:
> > On 7/21/14, 12:23 PM, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> > >On 21/07/2014 7:31 p.m., Andi Kleen wrote:
> > >>Jiri Olsa writes:
> > >>>
> > >>>[jolsa@ibm-x3650m4-01 pe
Em Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:36:54PM -0600, David Ahern escreveu:
> On 7/21/14, 12:23 PM, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> >On 21/07/2014 7:31 p.m., Andi Kleen wrote:
> >>Jiri Olsa writes:
> >>>
> >>>[jolsa@ibm-x3650m4-01 perf]$ sudo ./perf report --stdio
> >>>Timestamp below last timeslice flush
> >>>0x2276f
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 09:23:49PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 21/07/2014 7:31 p.m., Andi Kleen wrote:
> >Jiri Olsa writes:
> >>
> >>[jolsa@ibm-x3650m4-01 perf]$ sudo ./perf report --stdio
> >>Timestamp below last timeslice flush
> >>0x2276f58 [0x68]: failed to process type: 9
> >
> >FWIW we'
On 21/07/2014 9:36 p.m., David Ahern wrote:
On 7/21/14, 12:23 PM, Adrian Hunter wrote:
On 21/07/2014 7:31 p.m., Andi Kleen wrote:
Jiri Olsa writes:
[jolsa@ibm-x3650m4-01 perf]$ sudo ./perf report --stdio
Timestamp below last timeslice flush
0x2276f58 [0x68]: failed to process type: 9
FWIW
On 7/21/14, 12:23 PM, Adrian Hunter wrote:
On 21/07/2014 7:31 p.m., Andi Kleen wrote:
Jiri Olsa writes:
[jolsa@ibm-x3650m4-01 perf]$ sudo ./perf report --stdio
Timestamp below last timeslice flush
0x2276f58 [0x68]: failed to process type: 9
FWIW we're seeing this frequently too.
Jiri's ex
On 21/07/2014 7:31 p.m., Andi Kleen wrote:
Jiri Olsa writes:
[jolsa@ibm-x3650m4-01 perf]$ sudo ./perf report --stdio
Timestamp below last timeslice flush
0x2276f58 [0x68]: failed to process type: 9
FWIW we're seeing this frequently too.
Jiri's example didn't work for me. Do you have one?
Jiri Olsa writes:
>
> [jolsa@ibm-x3650m4-01 perf]$ sudo ./perf report --stdio
> Timestamp below last timeslice flush
> 0x2276f58 [0x68]: failed to process type: 9
FWIW we're seeing this frequently too.
-Andi
--
a...@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
--
To unsubscribe from this list:
On 07/21/2014 03:35 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 03:09:07PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>
> SNIP
>
...so is the 100MB limit needed at all if you have ROUND
events?
>>>
>>> for data files captured without the ROUND events fix
>>
>> I am not sure it should be the de
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 03:09:07PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
SNIP
> >>
> >> ...so is the 100MB limit needed at all if you have ROUND
> >> events?
> >
> > for data files captured without the ROUND events fix
>
> I am not sure it should be the default then, if it is
> not needed going forward.
On 07/21/2014 12:54 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 11:47:35AM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>
> SNIP
>
> If PERF_RECORD_FINISHED_ROUND is missing the queue will
Why is it missing?
>>>
>>> it's stored only for tracepoints now patch 17 fixies that
>>
>> Wouldn't that mak
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 11:47:35AM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
SNIP
> >>> If PERF_RECORD_FINISHED_ROUND is missing the queue will
> >>
> >> Why is it missing?
> >
> > it's stored only for tracepoints now patch 17 fixies that
>
> Wouldn't that make a huge difference all by itself?
>
> I would m
On 07/21/2014 11:02 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 09:43:58AM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>> On 07/21/2014 12:55 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>>> hi,
>>> this patchset factors session's ordered samples queue,
>>> and allows to limit the size of this queue.
>>>
>>> v3 changes:
>>> - rebase
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 09:43:58AM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 07/21/2014 12:55 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > hi,
> > this patchset factors session's ordered samples queue,
> > and allows to limit the size of this queue.
> >
> > v3 changes:
> > - rebased to latest tip/perf/core
> > - add comme
On 07/21/2014 12:55 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> hi,
> this patchset factors session's ordered samples queue,
> and allows to limit the size of this queue.
>
> v3 changes:
> - rebased to latest tip/perf/core
> - add comment for WARN in patch 8 (David)
> - added ordered-events debug variable (David
hi,
this patchset factors session's ordered samples queue,
and allows to limit the size of this queue.
v3 changes:
- rebased to latest tip/perf/core
- add comment for WARN in patch 8 (David)
- added ordered-events debug variable (David)
- renamed ordered_events_(get|put) to ordered_events_
19 matches
Mail list logo
