Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 18 Apr 2008 12:51:46 +0200 | From | Andi Kleen <> | Subject | Re: [v2.6.26] what's brewing in x86.git for v2.6.26 |
| |
> Andi will have to prove his points by coming up with competing benchmark > results -
My point was really: "don't merge based on bogus benchmarks" or perhaps better put: every time you see a benchmark result turn on your brain and make sure it is really measuring something that makes sense and also "don't put results from bogus benchmarks into change logs"
I actually don't have a big issue with the patches themselves (they seem reasonably clean so they don't make the code worse, although I don't think they are a significant improvement over the previous code either), just with the methology they were submitted.
> I dont really understand the negativism that comes from Andi - he was
I object to using bogus benchmarks.
> very much aware of the various iterations and benchmarks you did when > developing this rather cool feature: he participated in those threads > and was Cc:-ed as well. The "100% bogus benchmark with the most
The initial "1...n" benchmark after which you merged the patch definitely fit my "bogus" description. If there was a later better one I had missed that indeed, sorry and I don't remember being cc'ed on one such (except in Alexander's latest answer which satisfied me)
-Andi
| |