Re: [discuss] Re: 2.6.19-rc5: known regressions (v3)
From: Andi Kleen
Date: Thu Nov 16 2006 - 02:05:19 EST
On Thursday 16 November 2006 06:05, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 04:21:09 +0100
> Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > If it's really true that oprofile is simply busted then that's a serious
> > > problem and we should find some way of unbusting it. If that means just
> > > adding a dummy "0" entry which always returns zero or something like that,
> > > then fine.
> > That could be probably done.
> I'm told that this is exactly what it was doing before it got changed.
Hmm, ok perhaps that can be arranged again.
The trouble is that I want to use this performance counter for
other purposes too, so we would run into trouble again
if oprofile keeps stealing it.
> > > But we can't just go and bust it.
> > It just did something unbelievable broken before.
> What did it do?
Silently kill the nmi watchdog.
> > I would say it busted
> > itself.
> It gave profiles, which was fairly handy.
I'm sure it can be fixed there. Ok ok I keep sounding like a sysfs maintainer
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/