From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58E76C4320A for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 19:38:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FE9661102 for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 19:38:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235881AbhHETig (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Aug 2021 15:38:36 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:36044 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S242990AbhHETie (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Aug 2021 15:38:34 -0400 Received: from oasis.local.home (cpe-66-24-58-225.stny.res.rr.com [66.24.58.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 775CE61104; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 19:38:19 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2021 15:38:17 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Mathieu Desnoyers Cc: Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton , paulmck , Stefan Metzmacher , stable , linux-kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Fix: tracepoint: static call function vs data state mismatch (v2) Message-ID: <20210805153817.1c82dcc6@oasis.local.home> In-Reply-To: <1058325468.7289.1628190943244.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> References: <20210805132717.23813-1-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <20210805132717.23813-3-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <20210805145631.609e0a80@oasis.local.home> <1058325468.7289.1628190943244.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.3 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 5 Aug 2021 15:15:43 -0400 (EDT) Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > ----- On Aug 5, 2021, at 2:56 PM, rostedt rostedt@goodmis.org wrote: > > > Note, there shouldn't be a "(v2)" outside the "[PATCH ]" part. > > Otherwise it gets added into the git commit during "git am". > > Out of curiosity, do you know any way to annotate my local commits to have the > [PATCH v2] tag automatically generated by git send-email ? I pass -v2 to git send-email, and it adds the v2 for me. > > This is a big enough regression, I'll even add a Fixes tag to the next > > patch on the final sha1 of this patch! Such that this patch won't be > > backported without the next patch. > > This makes sense. I still wanted to keep the two patches separate so we would > introduce the (slow) state machine in the first patch, and optimize for > speed in the second. My intent is to facilitate of small logical changes, > and make bisection more precise in the future if we introduce an issue > here. I agree which is why I didn't ask you to fold them. The logic in this code was a big enough change, where I agree it should be kept separate. Unfortunately, it caused a huge performance regression :-(, but at the same time, fixed a correctness issue, which Thomas always says that correctness trumps performance. But the compromise is to add a Fixes tag to the next patch and document why they are separated, but still required to act as "one". I'll add that commentary. -- Steve > > Calling out more clearly how slow things become with this patch is indeed > important. > > > > >> >