On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 08:41:00AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 07:12 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 05:33:12PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >> >On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 20:14 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: >> > >> >> I've toyed with that idea myself. I keep coming back to the fact that >> >> you need >> >> a workload that would really leverage it, and I don't have one at the >> >> moment. >> > >> >To some extent that's true but just turning full preemption including >> >kernel side with all the associated debug bits and lockdep should make a >> >whole bunch of things show up even with ordinary workloads. >> >> I can look at doing that for ppc44x_defconfig. I'll be honest and say I >> don't >> expect it to go well, particularly with lockdep :). >> >> >For 440 tend to boot an ubuntu distro off NFS root with all X & DRI 3D >> >etc... and then run compiz :-) >> >> Yes. Because that's a totally realistic workload for a 440. I'm surprised >> you >> don't have a p595 machine acting as your home router too! ;) > >It doesn't need to be realistic. In fact, a "realistic" workload is the >worst thing to test with because it won't exercise all the "uncommon" >code path which are the ones likely to bite. > >So yesm it's not a "realistic" workload, but it's a good "torture" >workload to find bugs.
It was a joke. But yes, you make perfectly valid points :) josh _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev