From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753771AbaIPJyE (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Sep 2014 05:54:04 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f43.google.com ([209.85.220.43]:55726 "EHLO mail-pa0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753708AbaIPJx7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Sep 2014 05:53:59 -0400 Message-ID: <54180899.4060408@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 17:53:29 +0800 From: Wanpeng Li User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mike Galbraith , Toshi Kani CC: Yasuaki Ishimatsu , tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, bp@alien8.de, gong.chen@linux.intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com, x86@kernel.org, imammedo@redhat.com, huawei.libin@huawei.com, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com, peterz@infradead.org, Wanpeng Li , Linn Crosetto Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] x86,cpu-hotplug: assign same CPU number to readded CPU References: <53CF2A81.7080505@jp.fujitsu.com> <53D5CF2A.2030007@jp.fujitsu.com> <5407D27D.4020006@jp.fujitsu.com> <54114D83.7070004@jp.fujitsu.com> <1410755159.5165.24.camel@marge.simpson.net> <1410799463.28990.326.camel@misato.fc.hp.com> <1410839798.5149.22.camel@marge.simpson.net> In-Reply-To: <1410839798.5149.22.camel@marge.simpson.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Mike, 于 14-9-16 上午11:56, Mike Galbraith 写道: > On Mon, 2014-09-15 at 10:44 -0600, Toshi Kani wrote: >> On Mon, 2014-09-15 at 06:25 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: >>> On Thu, 2014-09-11 at 16:21 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote: >>>> There is no response for two months since posting v4. >>>> What can I do for pushing the patch to upstream? >>> Looks to me like we have two patches floating about for more or less the >>> same problem, this one, and... >>> >>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/7/29/159 >>> >>> ..this one, which you reviewed, and HP both reviewed and tested. >>> >>> We seem to kinda stuck with Boris having said don't diddle the >>> cpu_llc_shared_map, but HP/Intel saying that this map diddling fixes >>> their explosions. If your alternative is preferred over diddling >>> cpu_llc_shared_map, perhaps HP/Intel can test/confirm that their >>> explosions stay gone? >> Well, Boris mentioned later in his email: >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/7/22/201 >> >> And I agree with his assessment that both patches make sense. > Nonetheless, this just reeks of "department of redundancy department". > I have nothing against doing both really, but it does leave me wondering > if we would not then be merging the mask clearing "just because". Maybe you miss my reply. https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/7/29/40 Regards, Wanpeng Li > > -Mike > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/