On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 16:19 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 10:12 -0600, Will Schmidt wrote:
Tested-by: Will Schmidt will_schm...@vnet.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Will Schmidt will_schm...@vnet.ibm.com
Isn't it assumed that the one that made the patch also tested it? Well I
The tb_total and purr_total values reported via the hcall_stats code
should be cumulative, rather than being replaced by the latest delta tb
or purr value.
Tested-by: Will Schmidt will_schm...@vnet.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Will Schmidt will_schm...@vnet.ibm.com
---
[ This is a touch-up to the
On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 10:12 -0600, Will Schmidt wrote:
Tested-by: Will Schmidt will_schm...@vnet.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Will Schmidt will_schm...@vnet.ibm.com
Isn't it assumed that the one that made the patch also tested it? Well I
would hope that is the norm.
-- Steve
Hi Will,
The tb_total and purr_total values reported via the hcall_stats code
should be cumulative, rather than being replaced by the latest delta tb
or purr value.
Tested-by: Will Schmidt will_schm...@vnet.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Will Schmidt will_schm...@vnet.ibm.com
Ouch! Nice catch.