Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] perf pmu: Improve CPU core PMU HW event list ordering | From | John Garry <> | Date | Mon, 3 Aug 2020 14:23:56 +0100 |
| |
On 03/08/2020 13:54, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git >> >> Please let me know - it would be useful for any dev during the merge window. > So, I'm now pushing things directly to Linus, but just the tooling part, > the branch to do development on is: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/linux.git perf/core > > At some point I think we'll have a git/perf-tools/perf-tools.git, just > like tip, but for now, please use the one above. > > My perf/core in the past was rebaseable, I did changes in it after > publishing, trying to have solid bisectability, since I process patch by > patch doing tests on it when we noticed problems, prior to pushing to > Ingo for tip. > > Now I am making perf/core non-rebaseable, I push things there > periodically, tagging what is there with the test results, see: > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/linux.git/tag/?h=perf-tools-tests-2020-07-17 > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/linux.git/tag/?h=perf-tools-tests-2020-07-02 > > I'll try and tag today's state of that tree, which I did tests already > but since v5.8 was released, I merged it there and will retest and tag > the test results. > > The tmp.perf/core one is an experiment in making what I have in my local > tree available for more bleeding edge things that are being done, say in > that metrics effort, etc, but I think I'll stop that, since, as your > message shows, it is causing confusion. > > I did this because these tests take quite some time and sometimes I have > to fix things and restart it, rinse, repeat. > > So please use: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/linux.git perf/core >
If it makes sense, it could be useful to have this included in the MAINTAINERS file. That's for forgetful people like me :)
> I'll further automate all this so that we have a more regular cadence of > updates to perf/core, say every two days or so. > > If you have changes that touch both the kernel and userspace, the kernel > bits need to go via tip, the tooling via the perf tree, that for now > (well, it has been like that for quite a long time) is my tree.
ok, thanks for the detailed response.
> > Arch specific kernel bits have been going via the arch trees for quite a > while, I think. > > - Arnaldo > .
Cheers, john
| |