Okay, Frank's response raced with mine. Since Frank is not super motivated to submit a patch with his proposed changes to my patch, I'll do so. -- Bhavesh Davda ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bhavesh Davda" <bhavesh@xxxxxxxxxx> > To: "John Kacur" <jkacur@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: linux-rt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "frank rowand" <frank.rowand@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 4:03:23 PM > Subject: Re: [PATCH RT-TESTS] cyclictest: histogram overflow instance tracking > > To dispel any misunderstandings here, Frank had proposed a modified > patch based on my original patch which introduces the new '-g' > command line switch and the associated code. So all I'm saying is > that since my original patch has been committed unmodified, Frank > might want to submit a new patch off tip, if he feels strongly about > his suggestions (which I agree are great suggestions). > > I can promise to be "proactive" in reviewing the proposed patch :) > > -- > Bhavesh Davda > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "John Kacur" <jkacur@xxxxxxxxxx> > > To: "Bhavesh Davda" <bhavesh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: linux-rt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "frank rowand" > > <frank.rowand@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 3:53:29 PM > > Subject: Re: [PATCH RT-TESTS] cyclictest: histogram overflow > > instance tracking > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > Hello Frank, > > > > > > I apologize I didn't have a chance to review your proposed > > > modifications to my patch. > > > > > > I had looked at your proposal to introduce a '-g' option (for > > > lack > > > of > > > a better letter) instead of piggy-backing on the '-h' option, and > > > I > > > completely agree with that approach. > > > > > > It would be very handy to specify, for example, '-h 50 -g 1000' > > > to > > > capture and print the 1000 outliers beyond 50 us to get a good > > > sense > > > of any patterns hidden in the outliers. > > > > > > If John has already accepted my proposed patches, do you want to > > > propose your changes on top of that as a separate patch now? > > > > Please pull the git tree, have a look at what I put in, and then > > think about > > Frank's suggestions. Make sure you are "proactive" - (oh God, > > thinking about > > a Simpson's episode now), and see what you can do with it, instead > > of > > just > > waiting for Frank to tell you his opinions. > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > Thanks for your review, and your excellent suggestion to make > > > this > > > feature even more useful. > > > > > > -- > > > Bhavesh Davda > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Frank Rowand" <frank.rowand@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > To: "Bhavesh Davda" <bhavesh@xxxxxxxxxx>, "John Kacur" > > > > <jkacur@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: linux-rt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 3:41:20 PM > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH RT-TESTS] cyclictest: histogram overflow > > > > instance tracking > > > > > > > > On 10/25/12 14:36, Frank Rowand wrote: > > > > > On 10/16/12 10:02, Bhavesh Davda wrote: > > > > >> From: Bhavesh Davda <bhavesh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > >> > > > > >> Add feature to cyclictest histogram mode to track cycle > > > > >> counts > > > > >> every time a > > > > >> sample overflows the histogram limit. This should help > > > > >> identify > > > > >> if > > > > >> there is a > > > > >> timing pattern to jitters in cyclictest runs. > > > > >> > > > > >> Example output (with -h 10): > > > > >> ... > > > > >> Histogram Overflows: 00001 00007 00000 00009 00004 00007 > > > > >> 00000 > > > > >> 00001 > > > > >> Histogram Overflow at cycle number: > > > > >> Thread 0: 09964 > > > > >> Thread 1: 00000 00004 00006 00008 00010 09962 11594 > > > > >> Thread 2: > > > > >> Thread 3: 01169 04698 06782 09033 10299 11561 21517 28734 > > > > >> 29532 > > > > >> Thread 4: 11574 11580 11583 11586 > > > > >> Thread 5: 00020 09448 13954 14954 18954 20587 24973 > > > > >> Thread 6: > > > > >> Thread 7: 18950 > > > > >> ... > > > > >> > > > > >> Signed-off-by: Bhavesh Davda <bhavesh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > My comments up to "--" are not meant to be part of the header > > > > > of > > > > > the > > > > > following patch. > > > > > > > > > > I am including the following patch as my review of the patch > > > > > I > > > > > am > > > > > replying to. If the following patch is incorporated into the > > > > > reviewed patch, then you can add my: > > > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Tested-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > to the combined patch. > > > > > > > > < snip > > > > > > > > > Bhavesh, > > > > > > > > I never saw I reply to my suggestions. Unfortunately John took > > > > my > > > > reviewed-by for your white space patch and applied it to your > > > > "cyclictest: histogram overflow instance tracking" patch, > > > > without > > > > my suggestions, and released it in v0.85 rt-tests. > > > > > > > > So...., any thoughts about the suggestions in the email that > > > > this one is responding to? And also any thoughts about my > > > > second email in the series (I'll forward that one again to > > > > you). > > > > > > > > -Frank > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
