On Sat, 25 Feb 2017, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 04:10:37PM +0800, Tan Xiaojun wrote: > > > 2)If it is, where we will fix it more appropriate, perf_fuzzer(not set > > 0 or 100) or kernel(limit 1 to 99), or maybe it is the bug of > > hardware(too many hardware interruptions)? > > I think the best would be if the fuzzer would not set 0,100, those are > clearly 'unsafe' settings and you pretty much get to keep the pieces. > > I would like to preserve these settings for people that 'know' what > they're doing and are willing to take the risk, but clearly, when you > take the guard-rails off, things can come apart.
sorry for the delay responding, these e-mails ended up in the spam folder somehow. I could add a new "avoid stupid things as root" flag for the perf_fuzzer. Besides this issue, are there other known things to skip? Generally running a fuzzer as root can be a bad idea which is why I don't test that use case very often. I think there were other issues in the past, like certain ftrace combinations being known to lock the system. Vince
