From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964973AbWFHUNx (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jun 2006 16:13:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964975AbWFHUNx (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jun 2006 16:13:53 -0400 Received: from gprs189-60.eurotel.cz ([160.218.189.60]:20498 "EHLO spitz.ucw.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964973AbWFHUNw (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jun 2006 16:13:52 -0400 Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 20:13:36 +0000 From: Pavel Machek To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Cc: Nigel Cunningham , Andrew Morton , Don Zickus , ak@suse.de, shaohua.li@intel.com, miles.lane@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [2.6.17-rc5-mm2] crash when doing second suspend: BUG in arch/i386/kernel/nmi.c:174 Message-ID: <20060608201336.GD4006@ucw.cz> References: <4480C102.3060400@goop.org> <20060606230504.GC11696@redhat.com> <20060606162201.f0f9f308.akpm@osdl.org> <200606070938.34927.ncunningham@linuxmail.org> <44861899.1040506@goop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44861899.1040506@goop.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > But the problem is that there's nothing which keeps > track of whether the re-plugged cpus 1-N are the "same" > as the unplugged 1-N, and so nothing can apply the same > per-cpu settings to them. In the suspend/resume case > they clearly are, but in the general remove/add case, do > you really want the new CPU to get the same state as the > old one just because it ends up with the same logical > CPU number? Perhaps, but what if it doesn't even have > the same capabilities? > (Do we support heterogeneous > CPUs anyway?) It works for some people, but it certainly falls into unsupported category. -- Thanks for all the (sleeping) penguins.