From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
Milton Miller <miltonm@bga.com>
Subject: Re: Boot failure with next-20120208
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 12:24:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F6CCDDC.5000802@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120323122244.132198e3.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On 3/23/2012 12:22 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 12:16:41 -0800
> Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>>> The bug looks pretty generic, nothing very PPC-specific there. It
>>> might affect other architectures - we won't know until we find out
>>> wht caused it.
>>
>> well one half of the race looks pretty generic...
>> ..... doesn't mean the other half of the race is though....
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Ho hum, I suppose I should pull the patch out of linux-next, to
>>> avoid disrupting other testing. This means it's going to be hard
>>> to get the bug fixed.
>>
>> it means losing this one big PPC machine indeed.... until they hit
>> that same race some other way with regular real cpu hotplug ;-(
>
> So we're kinda stuck with this. As I can't merge it, I guess I'll make
> smp-start-up-non-boot-cpus-asynchronously.patch disappear.
well yeah, PPC is throwing things in the spanner
we're now working on an x86-only patch with basically the same
improvement, but done in a way that does not touch the other architectures
so by all means drop the patch
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Milton Miller <miltonm@bga.com>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: Boot failure with next-20120208
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 12:24:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F6CCDDC.5000802@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120323122244.132198e3.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On 3/23/2012 12:22 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 12:16:41 -0800
> Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>>> The bug looks pretty generic, nothing very PPC-specific there. It
>>> might affect other architectures - we won't know until we find out
>>> wht caused it.
>>
>> well one half of the race looks pretty generic...
>> ..... doesn't mean the other half of the race is though....
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Ho hum, I suppose I should pull the patch out of linux-next, to
>>> avoid disrupting other testing. This means it's going to be hard
>>> to get the bug fixed.
>>
>> it means losing this one big PPC machine indeed.... until they hit
>> that same race some other way with regular real cpu hotplug ;-(
>
> So we're kinda stuck with this. As I can't merge it, I guess I'll make
> smp-start-up-non-boot-cpus-asynchronously.patch disappear.
well yeah, PPC is throwing things in the spanner
we're now working on an x86-only patch with basically the same
improvement, but done in a way that does not touch the other architectures
so by all means drop the patch
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-23 19:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-12 0:38 Boot failure with next-20120208 Stephen Rothwell
2012-02-12 0:38 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-02-13 3:04 ` Michael Neuling
2012-02-13 3:04 ` Michael Neuling
2012-02-13 5:47 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-02-13 5:47 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-02-13 14:18 ` Arjan van de Ven
2012-02-13 14:18 ` Arjan van de Ven
2012-02-13 20:05 ` Andrew Morton
2012-02-13 20:05 ` Andrew Morton
2012-02-13 20:16 ` Arjan van de Ven
2012-02-13 20:16 ` Arjan van de Ven
2012-03-23 19:22 ` Andrew Morton
2012-03-23 19:22 ` Andrew Morton
2012-03-23 19:24 ` Arjan van de Ven [this message]
2012-03-23 19:24 ` Arjan van de Ven
2012-03-23 22:18 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-03-23 22:18 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-02-13 21:42 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-02-13 21:42 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4F6CCDDC.5000802@linux.intel.com \
--to=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mikey@neuling.org \
--cc=miltonm@bga.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.