From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ARM: smp: Fix the CPU hotplug race with scheduler.
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 17:06:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E013222.6080208@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110621231035.GE23802@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On 06/21/2011 04:10 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 01:16:47PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> On 06/21/2011 03:26 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 03:51:00PM +0530, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>>>> On 6/21/2011 3:49 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>>>> I won't be committing the init/calibrate.c change to a git tree - it
>>>>> isn't ARM stuff so it goes in patch form.
>>>> Patches with change log would be fine as well.
>>> The answer is not at the moment, but maybe soon.
>> Should we send those two patches to the stable trees as well? They seem
>> to fix issues with cpu onlining that have existed for a long time.
> Looks to me like the problem was introduced for 2.6.39-rc1, so we
> should probably get the fix into the 2.6.39-stable tree too.
Are we talking about the loops_per_jiffy problem or the cpu_active
problem? I would think the cpu_active problem has been there since SMP
support was added to ARM and the loops_per_jiffy problem has been there
(depending on the compiler) since 8a9e1b0 ([PATCH] Platform SMIs and
their interferance with tsc based delay calibration, 2005-06-23).
So pretty much every stable tree would want both of these patches.
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: sboyd@codeaurora.org (Stephen Boyd)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH] ARM: smp: Fix the CPU hotplug race with scheduler.
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 17:06:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E013222.6080208@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110621231035.GE23802@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On 06/21/2011 04:10 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 01:16:47PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> On 06/21/2011 03:26 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 03:51:00PM +0530, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>>>> On 6/21/2011 3:49 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>>>> I won't be committing the init/calibrate.c change to a git tree - it
>>>>> isn't ARM stuff so it goes in patch form.
>>>> Patches with change log would be fine as well.
>>> The answer is not at the moment, but maybe soon.
>> Should we send those two patches to the stable trees as well? They seem
>> to fix issues with cpu onlining that have existed for a long time.
> Looks to me like the problem was introduced for 2.6.39-rc1, so we
> should probably get the fix into the 2.6.39-stable tree too.
Are we talking about the loops_per_jiffy problem or the cpu_active
problem? I would think the cpu_active problem has been there since SMP
support was added to ARM and the loops_per_jiffy problem has been there
(depending on the compiler) since 8a9e1b0 ([PATCH] Platform SMIs and
their interferance with tsc based delay calibration, 2005-06-23).
So pretty much every stable tree would want both of these patches.
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ARM: smp: Fix the CPU hotplug race with scheduler.
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 17:06:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E013222.6080208@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110621231035.GE23802@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On 06/21/2011 04:10 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 01:16:47PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> On 06/21/2011 03:26 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 03:51:00PM +0530, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>>>> On 6/21/2011 3:49 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>>>> I won't be committing the init/calibrate.c change to a git tree - it
>>>>> isn't ARM stuff so it goes in patch form.
>>>> Patches with change log would be fine as well.
>>> The answer is not at the moment, but maybe soon.
>> Should we send those two patches to the stable trees as well? They seem
>> to fix issues with cpu onlining that have existed for a long time.
> Looks to me like the problem was introduced for 2.6.39-rc1, so we
> should probably get the fix into the 2.6.39-stable tree too.
Are we talking about the loops_per_jiffy problem or the cpu_active
problem? I would think the cpu_active problem has been there since SMP
support was added to ARM and the loops_per_jiffy problem has been there
(depending on the compiler) since 8a9e1b0 ([PATCH] Platform SMIs and
their interferance with tsc based delay calibration, 2005-06-23).
So pretty much every stable tree would want both of these patches.
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-22 0:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 67+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-20 9:23 [RFC PATCH] ARM: smp: Fix the CPU hotplug race with scheduler Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 9:23 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 9:23 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 9:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 9:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 9:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 10:14 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 10:14 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 10:28 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 10:28 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 10:35 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 10:35 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 10:45 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 10:45 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 11:42 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 11:42 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 10:44 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 10:44 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 10:47 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 10:47 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 11:13 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 11:13 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 11:25 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 11:25 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 11:40 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 11:40 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 11:51 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 11:51 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 12:19 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 12:19 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 12:27 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 12:27 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 12:57 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 12:57 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 14:23 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 14:23 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 14:54 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 14:54 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 15:01 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 15:01 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 15:10 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 15:10 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-21 9:08 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-21 9:08 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-21 10:00 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-21 10:00 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-21 10:17 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-21 10:17 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-21 10:19 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-21 10:19 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-21 10:21 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-21 10:21 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-21 10:26 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-21 10:26 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-21 20:16 ` Stephen Boyd
2011-06-21 20:16 ` Stephen Boyd
2011-06-21 20:16 ` Stephen Boyd
2011-06-21 23:10 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-21 23:10 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-22 0:06 ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2011-06-22 0:06 ` Stephen Boyd
2011-06-22 0:06 ` Stephen Boyd
2011-06-22 10:06 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-22 10:06 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-20 10:19 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 10:19 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-20 10:19 ` Santosh Shilimkar
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=4E013222.6080208@codeaurora.org \
--to=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=santosh.shilimkar@ti.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.