Re: [PATCH] Perf: Correct Assumptions about Sample Timestamps inPasses

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 10:09:53AM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
> On 12/20/13, 5:27 AM, Joseph Schuchart wrote:
> >I know this comes late, but: As far as I can see, your change does not
> >preserve the logic of the code I suggested. The idea was to first gather
> >all the maximum timestamps of all cpus (that is, the last timestamp seen
> >on each cpu) and then determine the minimum of these maxima. These are
> >two distinct steps that I think cannot be combined in one update. Your
> 
>  A number of people have reported similar problems -- timestamps
> below last flush time. This approach would solve that problem for
> data processed from files, so it would be a good improvement.

Could it be near what you're looking for?

https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/18/53
--
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/