From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm1-f65.google.com (mail-wm1-f65.google.com [209.85.128.65]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4181D7D716 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 21:37:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm1-f65.google.com with SMTP id a15so7492312wmj.5 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 14:37:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=google; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4YVVoTR9YEmTvSUeFlnpMmS74WodPhkonwsK1pnWwqs=; b=AUfgyUmri+ljJDiL+T6vvG+kZ0ROmRv0Jr6DiUZBr7B6NBqvGpq+7sow0M7Hv64sZQ 1iqOEDwS/P3D88D5/D3VqtxTfohF/8gngB7m8rQHm5XvqSvg5F0WZ0QhPTLUAvyD8Her yc708Tjgs7LbXBTfQZBvdKNq4Bw5NncRYuq7o= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4YVVoTR9YEmTvSUeFlnpMmS74WodPhkonwsK1pnWwqs=; b=NjxZPaHcEsJRpJYc755yHDLJAMt6E9G5IoTp3SAatO/ppp2RY8Ja/zYEnjYNEZYSf/ qRnboryTrRvU8QsQpbdPvhVJ3wBSEp2yW1SxinjVAfzuyGycSlbZJpSn82XarkvJQuI4 FTrGUT5rWabka0/XQ7a+0/LZJDdfLxmeZrwrOZ+H+nfJuFydeVt4YLJ0arZgv/ypBSXW jsHkH+mOlcOdNQRgBYICUKk3bayhomAP+U4t+nckPFZzmnCu/r5lBJwb3LP703sfQd2f G1OCix3OPWfjdBL1oNHw+yFo3JrccP9BF6wtVLokNW7jf4YID1IPgXM23+1tWgnR8AdR RR/Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVtVjP9C+BYuLe1dblm5bQ7fKNWeXsRx7waplfdgMbgz7O8Rn/v E+65c/7VRi4+xaSVKEonQMOfCA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw/+IgS2DY738J/stK1q7J7xWY3Z3ovheMBTn1xB6Yg+Ip96X5si71mwbpj2eQ78DwOelEWPQ== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:65c3:: with SMTP id z186mr5627662wmb.116.1561153073911; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 14:37:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hex (5751f4a1.skybroadband.com. [87.81.244.161]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z6sm3471271wrw.2.2019.06.21.14.37.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 21 Jun 2019 14:37:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <962677500f191acbfedbc026a5dd231155e2e744.camel@linuxfoundation.org> From: richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org To: Jon Mason Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 22:37:52 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <20190621154213.12761-1-jdmason@kudzu.us> <1a9c38dca2be655c935d435a6cf6f52ae8342bf6.camel@linuxfoundation.org> User-Agent: Evolution 3.32.2-1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [PATCH] oe_syslog.py: Handle syslogd/klogd restart race X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 21:37:53 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 2019-06-21 at 15:26 -0400, Jon Mason wrote: > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 1:44 PM Jon Mason wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:58 PM < > > richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > > > > > I realise there is slightly more overhead but it might give us > > > more > > > chance of fixing all the races? > > > > 4 extra function calls would almost be statistical noise. I'll > > code > > it up to do the check every time regardless and add it for each > > syslogd/klogd call. > > A timed run of testimage on a Cortex A57x4 system (with KVM enabled) > went from ~1m21s (1m23s, 1m22s,1m20s) to ~1m23s (1m22s, 1m25s, > 1m24s). > Without KVM enabled, it went from 20m6s to 20m56s. It's possible with > a larger sample size that they would converge even more, but I think > this is sufficient to show it's not a deal breaker to run it every > time. Sound good to me, thanks! :) Cheers, Richard