From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759701Ab2CWTYP (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Mar 2012 15:24:15 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:12065 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759604Ab2CWTYN (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Mar 2012 15:24:13 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,352,1309762800"; d="scan'208";a="121008509" Message-ID: <4F6CCDDC.5000802@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 12:24:12 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120312 Thunderbird/11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: Michael Neuling , Stephen Rothwell , LKML , gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, ppc-dev , Milton Miller Subject: Re: Boot failure with next-20120208 References: <20120212113805.c7e5d902c95a9d0f4037e12c@canb.auug.org.au> <16788.1329102254@neuling.org> <4F391BBA.5020506@linux.intel.com> <20120213120549.eab7e2b9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4F396FA9.90606@linux.intel.com> <20120323122244.132198e3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20120323122244.132198e3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 3/23/2012 12:22 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 12:16:41 -0800 > Arjan van de Ven 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 From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8911B6EE8 for ; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 06:34:34 +1100 (EST) Message-ID: <4F6CCDDC.5000802@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 12:24:12 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: Boot failure with next-20120208 References: <20120212113805.c7e5d902c95a9d0f4037e12c@canb.auug.org.au> <16788.1329102254@neuling.org> <4F391BBA.5020506@linux.intel.com> <20120213120549.eab7e2b9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4F396FA9.90606@linux.intel.com> <20120323122244.132198e3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20120323122244.132198e3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Michael Neuling , gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, LKML , Milton Miller , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, ppc-dev List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 3/23/2012 12:22 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 12:16:41 -0800 > Arjan van de Ven 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