From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752079AbbCTQ0f (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:26:35 -0400 Received: from mail-ie0-f171.google.com ([209.85.223.171]:32949 "EHLO mail-ie0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751314AbbCTQ0a (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:26:30 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20150320101558.GD17717@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20150320101558.GD17717@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 09:26:30 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: FoHwPOWerA_E3uKvptLAq9JOLNk Message-ID: Subject: Re: smp_call_function_single lockups From: Linus Torvalds To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Rafael David Tinoco , LKML , Thomas Gleixner , Jens Axboe , Frederic Weisbecker Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 3:15 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > Linus, any plans for this patch? I think it does solve a fair few issues > the current code has. So I didn't really have any plans. I think it's a good patch, and it might even fix a bug and improve code generation, but it didn't fix the lockup problem, so.. > do you want me to route it through tip (and write a changelog while I'm > at it) or will you be taking it yourself? If you think it's worth committing, then go ahead. Add my signed-off, although I have to note that I didn't do a lot of testing of that patch (I think it was compile-tested when I sent it out, and then I ended up running it for a while, and obviously it got *some* testing by the person who saw the lockup that just showed that it didn't fix the problem ;( Linus