On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 11:54:08 +
wrote:
> Just a quick update: I was able to reproduce this weird behavior that I wrote
> about but it turned out to be a problem with my testing.
>
> The test was faulty because of a mistake that I had made.
>
> Sorry for the extra noise.
No problem. Thanks
On Fri, 2021-02-12 at 13:16 +0100, Viktor Rosendahl wrote:
>
>
> However, for some reason I cannot reproduce the behavior now, allthough I use
> exactly the same kernel.
>
> Because humans are more often at fault than computers, I cannot deny the
> possibility that I would have misconfigured
On Thu, 2021-02-11 at 14:56 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 17:17:42 +0100
> Viktor Rosendahl wrote:
>
> > It seems to work but I discovered during testing that it seems like newer
> > kernels have a tendency to lose some latencies in longer bursts. I guess
> > this
> > is
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 17:17:42 +0100
Viktor Rosendahl wrote:
> It seems to work but I discovered during testing that it seems like newer
> kernels have a tendency to lose some latencies in longer bursts. I guess this
> is likely to be another regression in the preemptirqsoff tracer.
Not sure what
Thanks Steve for the long and detailed answer.
On Tue, 2021-01-26 at 14:26 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> > +#define verbose_sizechange() (verbosity >= 1)
> > +#define verbose_lostevent() (verbosity >= 2)
> > +
> > +static const char *debug_tracefile;
> > +static const char
5 matches
Mail list logo
