On Wed, 2 Sep 2026 23:49:42 +0800 Kunwu Chan <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Sep 2026 08:19:54 -0700 SJ Park <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Wed, 2 Sep 2026 23:08:41 +0800 Kunwu Chan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 1 Sep 2026 22:47:42 -0700 SJ Park <[email protected]> wrote: > > [...] > > > Both `sample_interval` and `aggr_interval` are zero here. Since > > > `sample_interval` is the denominator in `damon_nr_samples_per_aggr()`, > > > would it be better to keep `aggr_interval` non-zero when testing the > > > zero `sample_interval` case? > > > > > > This would make the test explicitly cover the divide-by-zero protection. > > > If the `aggr_interval == 0` behavior is also worth covering, perhaps it > > > could be tested separately. > > > > Thank you for your review and question, Kunwu! > > > > Yes, that kind of additional test case would be nice. Please feel free to > > post > > a patch if you'd like to! :) And no pressure, no rush. I will also > > consider > > doing it myself if it seems you are not interested. > > Thanks for the feedback, SJ! > > I will prepare a small follow-up patch for this test > clarity improvement. Looking forward to! > > Reviewed-by: Kunwu Chan <[email protected]> Thank you! Also appreciate your R-b: for other patches! Thanks, SJ [...]
