On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 08:41:39AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:12:23AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:31:15 -0700
> > Joel Fernandes wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Paul,
> > > Think some more about this counter, I think you mean 'successes' as in
> >
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 08:41:39AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:12:23AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:31:15 -0700
> > Joel Fernandes wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Paul,
> > > Think some more about this counter, I think you mean 'successes' as in
> >
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:12:23AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:31:15 -0700
> Joel Fernandes wrote:
>
> > Hi Paul,
> > Think some more about this counter, I think you mean 'successes' as in
> > 'successful attempts' than 'successful test' ? If so, then perhaps you can
>
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:12:23AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:31:15 -0700
> Joel Fernandes wrote:
>
> > Hi Paul,
> > Think some more about this counter, I think you mean 'successes' as in
> > 'successful attempts' than 'successful test' ? If so, then perhaps you can
>
On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:31:15 -0700
Joel Fernandes wrote:
> Hi Paul,
> Think some more about this counter, I think you mean 'successes' as in
> 'successful attempts' than 'successful test' ? If so, then perhaps you can
> drop this patch. It wasn't clear to me what the 'successes' meant so I may
>
On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:31:15 -0700
Joel Fernandes wrote:
> Hi Paul,
> Think some more about this counter, I think you mean 'successes' as in
> 'successful attempts' than 'successful test' ? If so, then perhaps you can
> drop this patch. It wasn't clear to me what the 'successes' meant so I may
>
On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 11:22:15PM -0700, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> From: "Joel Fernandes (Google)"
>
> rcutorture currently increments both successes and error counters for
> the rcu_barrier test incase of errors. It should only increment the
> error counter incase of errors so make it do so.
>
On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 11:22:15PM -0700, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> From: "Joel Fernandes (Google)"
>
> rcutorture currently increments both successes and error counters for
> the rcu_barrier test incase of errors. It should only increment the
> error counter incase of errors so make it do so.
>
From: "Joel Fernandes (Google)"
rcutorture currently increments both successes and error counters for
the rcu_barrier test incase of errors. It should only increment the
error counter incase of errors so make it do so.
Test: Introduced rcu_barrier errors by returning from the barrier
callback
From: "Joel Fernandes (Google)"
rcutorture currently increments both successes and error counters for
the rcu_barrier test incase of errors. It should only increment the
error counter incase of errors so make it do so.
Test: Introduced rcu_barrier errors by returning from the barrier
callback
10 matches
Mail list logo
