From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751404AbWFGAas (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jun 2006 20:30:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751405AbWFGAar (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jun 2006 20:30:47 -0400 Received: from pop5-1.us4.outblaze.com ([205.158.62.125]:64434 "HELO pop5-1.us4.outblaze.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751404AbWFGAar (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jun 2006 20:30:47 -0400 From: Nigel Cunningham To: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [2.6.17-rc5-mm2] crash when doing second suspend: BUG in arch/i386/kernel/nmi.c:174 Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 10:31:50 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: jeremy@goop.org, dzickus@redhat.com, ak@suse.de, shaohua.li@intel.com, miles.lane@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <4480C102.3060400@goop.org> <200606071013.53490.ncunningham@linuxmail.org> <20060606172410.b901950e.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20060606172410.b901950e.akpm@osdl.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1182940.MILoeL8yEn"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200606071031.55292.ncunningham@linuxmail.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --nextPart1182940.MILoeL8yEn Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Hi. On Wednesday 07 June 2006 10:24, you wrote: > On Wed, 7 Jun 2006 10:13:49 +1000 > > Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > > 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?) > > > > Indeed. I'm also not sure that there's necessarily a guarantee that cpus > > will be hotplugged in the same order. Perhaps those with more knowledge > > can clarify there. > > It all depends on what we mean by "per-cpu state". If we were to remember > that "CPU 7 needs 0x1234 in register 44" then that would be wrong. But > remembering some high-level functional thing like "CPU 7 needs to run the > NMI watchdog" is fine. The CPU bringup code can work out whether that is > possible, and how to do it. Does that imply that there's no danger of cpus being hotplugged in a differ= ent=20 order (so that cpu7 becomes cpu5, for example)? I guess I'm missing an understanding of why one cpu would need a different= =20 configuration to the rest. If it's related to the cpu number, then it=20 shouldn't matter if a different cpu gets the number, should it? If it's=20 related to the node that the cpu is on, perhaps the hotplugging code for th= e=20 driver should be checking for the reason ("Am I on the node with the... ?")= =20 rather than the cpu number? Regards, Nigel =2D-=20 Nigel, Michelle and Alisdair Cunningham 5 Mitchell Street Cobden 3266 Victoria, Australia --nextPart1182940.MILoeL8yEn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBEhh57N0y+n1M3mo0RAl9gAKDfvDTtvlUNjggRPBsuxdKzrX2v9QCbB2AB 5HYeWrXJL1ZVFizhPGxfIK8= =f6Fd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1182940.MILoeL8yEn--