From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: John Levon <levon@movementarian.org>
Cc: oprofile-list@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jbarnes@sgi.com, anton@samba.org,
phil.el@wanadoo.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH] improve OProfile on many-way systems
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 16:36:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040821163628.10cfa049.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040821232206.GC20175@compsoc.man.ac.uk>
John Levon <levon@movementarian.org> wrote:
>
> > how do we know when it has had sufficient testing for its swim upstream?
>
> I thought one of the points of the mm tree was to give things some
> testing first.
Well yes, but it's not magic.
Before merging up a large patch which was lightly tested by its developer
I'd like to now that it was beaten on in an organised manner. I am not
aware of anyone performing regression tests againt oprofile in any kernel,
let alone -mm.
One of my mental checkpoints before sending a patch to Linus is "has this
been sufficiently tested". I don't know how to answer that in this case.
In fact I don't know how to answer that in a _lot_ of cases, but if I know
that people are using the feature in anger and we're sufficiently early in
the 2.6.x cycle then I'll assume that regressions will be picked up. But
again, I'm not confident that oprofile is getting sufficiently frequent use
for this to apply.
Anyway. My question was mainly a prod in the antonward direction ;)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-08-21 23:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-21 19:26 [PATCH] improve OProfile on many-way systems John Levon
2004-08-21 20:58 ` Andrew Morton
2004-08-21 22:06 ` Jesse Barnes
2004-08-21 23:14 ` John Levon
2004-08-22 4:34 ` Anton Blanchard
2004-08-24 0:07 ` John Levon
2004-08-21 23:22 ` John Levon
2004-08-21 23:36 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2004-08-21 23:55 ` John Levon
2004-08-22 4:41 ` Andrew Morton
2004-08-22 22:42 ` John Levon
2004-08-22 3:50 ` Anton Blanchard
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040821163628.10cfa049.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=jbarnes@sgi.com \
--cc=levon@movementarian.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oprofile-list@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=phil.el@wanadoo.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.