Re: [PATCH] net: smc911x: convert pxa dma to dmaengine

Hi Robert, At Sat, 06 Feb 2016 10:05:51 +0100, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > > David Miller writes: > > > From: Robert Jarzmik > > Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 22:44:56 +0100 > > > >> Apart from Alberto who answered he cannot test it by lack of hardware, the > >> others didn't answer. > >> > >> So how c

Re: [PATCH 1/9] move io-64-nonatomic*.h out of asm-generic

-- > include/linux/io-64-nonatomic-hi-lo.h | 32 > ++ > include/linux/io-64-nonatomic-lo-hi.h | 32 > ++ Thanks, changes for edac drivers and headers seem good to me. Acked-by: Hitoshi Mitake Tha

Re: [PATCH v2 00/15] x86, alternatives: Instruction padding and more robust JMPs

all results by executing one command only with "-r > all". > > Patches coming as a reply to this message. I'm not sure I'm a suitable person for reviewing your patch, but I tested this patchset for perf bench with your latest (v2) patchset for x86 alternatives. It lo

Re: [PATCH 3/7] perf lock: plug some memleaks

At Mon, 9 Sep 2013 08:31:38 +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > > Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > > diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-lock.c b/tools/perf/builtin-lock.c > > index d318862..7784347 100644 > > --- a/tools/perf/builtin-lock.c > > +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-lock.c > > @@ -321,10 +321,12 @@ stati

Re: [PATCH 5/7] perf lock: do not cut lock name

Hi Davidlohr, thanks for your enhancements and cleanings! At Sun, 8 Sep 2013 19:19:17 -0700, Bueso wrote: > > While this could be seen as personal taste, there really isn't any > reason for being so stingy printing the lock name. Furthermore, some > symbol names are really just too long, and c

Re: [PATCH] perf, tools, bench: Fix memcpy benchmark for large sizes v2

At Thu, 18 Jul 2013 15:43:18 -0700, Andi Kleen wrote: > > From: Andi Kleen > > glibc calloc() has an optimization to not explicitely memset() > very large calloc allocations that just came from mmap(), > because they are known to be zero. > > This could result in the perf memcpy benchmark readi

Re: [PATCH] perf, tools, bench: Fix memcpy benchmark for large sizes

At Tue, 16 Jul 2013 13:11:00 +0300 (EEST), Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > Andi Kleen wrote: > > From: Andi Kleen > > > > glibc calloc() has an optimization to not explicitely memset() > > very large calloc allocations that just came from mmap(), > > because they are known to be zero. > > > > Thi

Re: [PATCH] perf, tools, bench: Fix memcpy benchmark for large sizes

mail.com > > Cc: kirill.shute...@linux.intel.com > > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen > > Acked-by: Kirill A. Shutemov Thanks for this fix, Andi. Acked-by: Hitoshi Mitake > > > --- > > tools/perf/bench/mem-memcpy.c | 2 ++ > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

Re: [PATCH] perf bench: fix memory allocation fail check in mem{set,cpy} workloads

Hi Kirill, At Thu, 6 Jun 2013 14:35:03 +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" > > Addresses of allocated memory areas saved to '*src' and '*dst', so we > need to check them for NULL, not 'src' and 'dst&#

Re: [PATCH] perf bench: Flush stdout before starting bench suite

es. Other lines are printed > after reaping all those tasks. > > So fix it by flushing stdout before starting bench suites. Thanks a lot, I couldn't notice this problem. Acked-by: Hitoshi Mitake > > Cc: Hitoshi Mitake > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim > --- > tools/p

[PATCH 3/3] tools/testing: port functionality tests of futextest to tools/testing/selftests

Darren Hart Cc: Eric Dumazet Signed-off-by: Hitoshi Mitake --- tools/testing/selftests/Makefile |2 +- tools/testing/selftests/futex/.gitignore |9 + tools/testing/selftests/futex/Makefile | 32 ++ tools/testing/selftests/futex/futex_requeu

[PATCH 2/3] perf bench: port futex_wait.c of futextest to perf bench

.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/dvhart/futextest.git Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Paul Mackerras Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Cc: Darren Hart Cc: Eric Dumazet Signed-off-by: Hitoshi Mitake --- tools/perf/Makefile |1 + tools/perf/bench/bench.h |1 + tools/per

[PATCH 1/3] tools: add new headers for futex and atomic operations

typedefing and volatile declaration. But I think these warns are not essential problems. If these are not acceptable, I'll seek other way. Cc: Darren Hart Cc: Eric Dumazet Signed-off-by: Hitoshi Mitake --- tools/include/tools/atomic.h | 95 ++ tools/include/tools/futex.h |

[PATCH 0/3] perf, tools/testing: merge futextest into perf bench and tools/testing

git/dvhart/futextest.git Hitoshi Mitake (3): tools: add new headers for futex and atomic operations perf bench: port futex_wait.c of futextest to perf bench tools/testing: port functionality tests of futextest to tools/testing/selftests tools/include/tools/atomic.h

Re: [PATCH v1, RFC] sheep: writeback cache semantics in backend store

Really sorry, I mistakenly sent below patch to LKML. Please discard this... On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 1:56 AM, Hitoshi Mitake wrote: > v1: differences from v0 are, > * check syncfs() in configure script > * send SD_OP_FLUSH_PEER to all sheeps > > This patch implements writeback cac

[PATCH v1, RFC] sheep: writeback cache semantics in backend store

ut the benchmark produced extreme artificial workload. So I think this patch might be suitable for certain environments with less active VMs. Cc: MORITA Kazutaka Signed-off-by: Hitoshi Mitake --- configure.ac |2 +- include/internal_proto.h |1 + sheep/ops.c