From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [x86/mm] e2a7dcce31: kernel_BUG_at_arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
Date: Sun, 28 May 2017 10:11:20 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1495980680.29205.68.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrX71xoZN2MsPVm+zMg9XrrUyMz6bzfLn3B9Vs0cTnegQA@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 818 bytes --]
On Sat, 2017-05-27 at 09:00 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 6:31 AM, kernel test robot
> <xiaolong.ye@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > FYI, we noticed the following commit:
> >
> > commit: e2a7dcce31f10bd7471b4245a6d1f2de344e7adf ("x86/mm: Rework
> > lazy TLB to track the actual loaded mm")
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/luto/linux.git
> > x86/tlbflush_cleanup
>
> Ugh, there's an unpleasant interaction between this patch and
> intel_idle. I suspect that the intel_idle code in question is either
> wrong or pointless,
It would be pointless if my "make lazy TLB mode even lazier"
patch from last year had been applied.
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9307541/
I guess I'll go re-send that and investigate the intel_idle
code in addition to that.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>,
X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, LKP <lkp@01.org>
Subject: Re: [x86/mm] e2a7dcce31: kernel_BUG_at_arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
Date: Sun, 28 May 2017 10:11:20 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1495980680.29205.68.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrX71xoZN2MsPVm+zMg9XrrUyMz6bzfLn3B9Vs0cTnegQA@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, 2017-05-27 at 09:00 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 6:31 AM, kernel test robot
> <xiaolong.ye@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > FYI, we noticed the following commit:
> >
> > commit: e2a7dcce31f10bd7471b4245a6d1f2de344e7adf ("x86/mm: Rework
> > lazy TLB to track the actual loaded mm")
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/luto/linux.git
> > x86/tlbflush_cleanup
>
> Ugh, there's an unpleasant interaction between this patch and
> intel_idle. I suspect that the intel_idle code in question is either
> wrong or pointless,
It would be pointless if my "make lazy TLB mode even lazier"
patch from last year had been applied.
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9307541/
I guess I'll go re-send that and investigate the intel_idle
code in addition to that.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-28 14:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-27 13:31 [x86/mm] e2a7dcce31: kernel_BUG_at_arch/x86/mm/tlb.c kernel test robot
2017-05-27 13:31 ` kernel test robot
2017-05-27 16:00 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-27 16:00 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-27 16:56 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-27 16:56 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-31 4:05 ` Arjan van de Ven
2017-05-31 4:05 ` Arjan van de Ven
2017-05-31 12:44 ` Rik van Riel
2017-05-31 12:44 ` Rik van Riel
2017-05-31 13:53 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-31 13:53 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-28 8:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-05-28 8:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-05-28 14:11 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2017-05-28 14:11 ` Rik van Riel
2017-05-28 15:57 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-28 15:57 ` Andy Lutomirski
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=1495980680.29205.68.camel@redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=lkp@lists.01.org \
/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.