From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>,
Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
Linux Kernel Mail List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Regression 3.4] tick_broadcast_mask is not restored after a CPU has been offline/onlined
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:08:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120730170847.GE2391@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120730230747.7637112a@feng-i7>
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 11:07:47PM +0800, Feng Tang wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 06:39:13 -0700
> "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 03:15:59PM +0800, Feng Tang wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > When I debugged a suspend/resume bug, I found that tick_broadcast_mask is
> > > not restored for a CPU after it is offline/onlined since kernel 3.4, while
> > > it's fine for 3.3.
> >
> > Could you please try 3.5?
>
> Yes, it's the same for 3.5
Thank you for checking, Feng.
Len, the comment above the change says:
/*
* FIXME: Design the ACPI notification to make it once per
* system instead of once per-cpu. This condition is a hack
* to make the code that updates C-States be called once.
*/
Is it time for this design-level change? Or is there something obvious
that I missed when fixing the smp_processor_id() splat?
I could revert back, but use raw_smp_processor_id() rather than
smp_processor_id(), but that feels like papering over a problem rather
than fixing it.
Thoughts?
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-30 17:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20120730151559.772d4055@feng-i7>
2012-07-30 13:39 ` [Regression 3.4] tick_broadcast_mask is not restored after a CPU has been offline/onlined Paul E. McKenney
2012-07-30 15:07 ` Feng Tang
2012-07-30 17:08 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2012-07-30 17:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-07-31 3:18 ` Feng Tang
2012-07-31 4:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20120730170847.GE2391@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul.mckenney@linaro.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
/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.