Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] posix-timers: Support delivery of signals to the
 current thread
In-Reply-To: <CACT4Y+aqT=e30Rvhz233NQBqXioNE11kPWbfcdnYQPk8QMkRBQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20221216171807.760147-1-dvyukov@google.com>
 <CACT4Y+aqT=e30Rvhz233NQBqXioNE11kPWbfcdnYQPk8QMkRBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 Jan 2023 22:28:29 +0100
Message-ID: <87tu0wep6q.ffs@tglx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jan 11 2023 at 16:49, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 at 18:18, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> wrote:
>> We are trying to implement sampling program analysis based on this.
>> We don't need 100% uniform sampling as a CPU profiler would need,
>> but we still need the signals to be reasonably distributed across
>> the process threads.
>>
>> Thomas, does the idea look sane to you overall?
>> Are there any existing alternatives to this?
>
> Hi Thomas,
>
> I guess this was lost in your inbox during the holidays period.
> Please take a look. Should I mail this as a non-RFC patch?

It's not lost it's just in that huge pile of backlog. I'll get to it in
the next days.

Though it would be probably good to resend and explicitely CC

       Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
       Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
       Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>

Thanks,

        tglx