Re: [PATCH] improve OProfile on many-way systems

[Andrew Morton]

John Levon <levon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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 ;)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/