Hello Steven,
On Tue, Jan 06, 2026 at 11:11:42AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jan 2026 12:24:09 +0000
Mark Rutland [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Whoops; s/CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL/PROFILE_ANNOTATED_BRANCHES/ in both
places in my reply.
Note, it could still be useful ;-)
I've been running my yearly branch profiling build on both my main
workstation and my server. I post the results from my server publicly (this
is updated every night):
https://rostedt.org/branches/current
If you check out the branch_annotated file, you can see there's still quite
a bit that gets it wrong. Some of these is because of bad assumptions by
the developer, others is because the code moved around causing new branches
to make later annotated branches go the opposite way.
I am starting to look and remove some of these likely/unlikely hint that
are 100% wrong on some very sane configuration (arm64 baremetal hosts
running a webserver).
So far, these are the fixes I have in flight now.
* https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260105-dcache-v1-1-f0d904b4a7c2@debian.org/ (local)
* https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260106-blk_unlikely-v1-1-90fb556a6776@debian.org/ (local)
* https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260105-annotated_idle-v1-1-10ddf0771b58@debian.org/ (local)