From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-la0-f42.google.com (mail-la0-f42.google.com [209.85.215.42]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 645EF2C0082 for ; Sat, 5 Jan 2013 06:44:17 +1100 (EST) Received: by mail-la0-f42.google.com with SMTP id fe20so10365020lab.15 for ; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 11:44:14 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <50E73EB6.9090100@mvista.com> Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 23:42:30 +0300 From: Sergei Shtylyov MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Srivatsa Vaddagiri Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "nohz: Fix idle ticks in cpu summary line of /proc/stat" (commit 7386cdbf2f57ea8cff3c9fde93f206e58b9fe13f). References: <1357268337-8025-1-git-send-email-vatsa@codeaurora.org> <50E6C776.7060707@mvista.com> <20130104192934.GB29866@quicinc.com> In-Reply-To: <20130104192934.GB29866@quicinc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, mhocko@suse.cz, "H. Peter Anvin" , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Russell King , x86@kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , "Paul E. McKenney" , Mike Frysinger , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Stephen Boyd , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ralf Baechle , Paul Mundt , srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Martin Schwidefsky , uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "David S. Miller" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hello. On 01/04/2013 10:29 PM, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote: >>> With offline cpus no longer beeing seen in nohz mode (ts->idle_active=0), we >>> don't need the check for cpu_online() introduced in commit 7386cdbf. Offline >> Please also specify the summary of that commit in parens (or >> however you like). > I had that in Subject line, but yes would be good to include in commit message > as well. I will incorporate that change alongwith anything else required in > next version of this patch. Ah, that was a revert with atypical subject -- didn't notice. Then there's no need to specify it twice. > - vatsa WBR, Sergei