On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 07:34:08PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > Kernel Summit 2014 had a topic on performance regressions and catching > them. The situation relatively recently has been good but I believe this > is partially due to major distributions stabilising recently and hardware > vendors working on performance for their latest platforms. On thing I fear is > that we miss performance regressions because releases contains performance > gains and losses, some of which balance out. After a number of mainline > releases, the performance may look ok but in comparison to a distribution > kernel cherry-picking the picture is not as rosy. The 3.0-longterm > included a number of performance-related patches so it could be used as > a good performance baseline for later releases. It is no longer maintained. > > This series contains a large number of patches against 3.12-longterm that > never made it to stable as the bugs were not serious enough or they were > performance patches. 3.10-longterm may need other pre-requisites I did > not research and 3.14-longterm should be able to apply a subset although > I have not tested the result. > I've finally applied the rest of these to the 3.14-stable queue, thanks again for providing them. greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html