From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Boyd Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ARM: smp: Fix the CPU hotplug race with scheduler. Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 17:06:58 -0700 Message-ID: <4E013222.6080208@codeaurora.org> References: <20110620114019.GH2082@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110620142338.GL2082@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4DFF5F29.2000904@ti.com> <4E005F92.8030208@ti.com> <20110621100057.GB23802@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4E006FA0.7050508@ti.com> <20110621101900.GC23802@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4E00708C.6050108@ti.com> <20110621102600.GD23802@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4E00FC2F.1010400@codeaurora.org> <20110621231035.GE23802@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110621231035.GE23802@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-arm-kernel-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Santosh Shilimkar , Thomas Gleixner , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org 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.