Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] perf pmu: Improve CPU core PMU HW event list ordering

From: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, <will@kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <linuxarm@huawei.com>,
	Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] perf pmu: Improve CPU core PMU HW event list ordering
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 14:23:56 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <27e46a45-9055-dbb7-324e-28a65120091d@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200803125423.GA3440834@kernel.org>

On 03/08/2020 13:54, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git
>>
>> Please let me know - it would be useful for any dev during the merge window.
> So, I'm now pushing things directly to Linus, but just the tooling part,
> the branch to do development on is:
> 
>    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/linux.git perf/core
> 
> At some point I think we'll have a git/perf-tools/perf-tools.git, just
> like tip, but for now, please use the one above.
> 
> My perf/core in the past was rebaseable, I did changes in it after
> publishing, trying to have solid bisectability, since I process patch by
> patch doing tests on it when we noticed problems, prior to pushing to
> Ingo for tip.
> 
> Now I am making perf/core non-rebaseable, I push things there
> periodically, tagging what is there with the test results, see:
> 
>    https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/linux.git/tag/?h=perf-tools-tests-2020-07-17
>    https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/linux.git/tag/?h=perf-tools-tests-2020-07-02
> 
> I'll try and tag today's state of that tree, which I did tests already
> but since v5.8 was released, I merged it there and will retest and tag
> the test results.
> 
> The tmp.perf/core one is an experiment in making what I have in my local
> tree available for more bleeding edge things that are being done, say in
> that metrics effort, etc, but I think I'll stop that, since, as your
> message shows, it is causing confusion.
> 
> I did this because these tests take quite some time and sometimes I have
> to fix things and restart it, rinse, repeat.
> 
> So please use:
> 
>    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/linux.git perf/core
> 

If it makes sense, it could be useful to have this included in the 
MAINTAINERS file. That's for forgetful people like me :)

> I'll further automate all this so that we have a more regular cadence of
> updates to perf/core, say every two days or so.
> 
> If you have changes that touch both the kernel and userspace, the kernel
> bits need to go via tip, the tooling via the perf tree, that for now
> (well, it has been like that for quite a long time) is my tree.

ok, thanks for the detailed response.

> 
> Arch specific kernel bits have been going via the arch trees for quite a
> while, I think.
> 
> - Arnaldo
> .

Cheers,
john