Re: [PATCH] perf tests switch-tracking: Fix timestamp comparison

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>]

On Thu, May 22, 2025 at 10:49:31PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 06:52:45PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > Hi Leo,
> > 
> > On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 04:31:58PM +0100, Leo Yan wrote:
> > > Hi Ian, Namhyung,
> > > 
> > > [ - Mailing list ]
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 10:05:16AM +0100, Leo Yan wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 12:54:12PM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 1, 2025 at 2:14 AM Leo Yan <leo.yan@arm.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 01:18:31PM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [...]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm reminded of a Java check I wrote for this:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Nice short article.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > In clang -Wshorten-64-to-32 looks to cover this. I'll see if we can
> > > > > > > clean those warnings up a bit.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I checked a bit and seems GCC has no this flag, but it makes sense for
> > > > > > me to enable the flag for Clang.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks a lot, Ian.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I made a small variation to the change in:
> > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250401182347.3422199-10-irogers@google.com/
> > > > > to avoid a subtract and just directly compare the values.
> > > 
> > > Do you mind to pick up my this patch? :) Our internal CI reports the
> > > test case 109_Track_with_sched_switch failure daily, I am just wandering
> > > if we could apply the fix quickly.
> > 
> > Arnaldo is taking care of patches for v6.15.
> > 
> > Arnaldo, can you please take this?
> 
> >From what I understood it people agreed to pick Ian's patch, ok.

But that is part of a larger patch, so since Ian reviewed Leo's patch,
I'll end up picking the more contained one, no bandwidth to check all
the other parts now.

- Arnaldo