From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1765060AbXKTXy2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Nov 2007 18:54:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756275AbXKTXyT (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Nov 2007 18:54:19 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:48922 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752507AbXKTXyS (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Nov 2007 18:54:18 -0500 Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:52:45 -0800 From: Greg KH To: David Miller Cc: mingo@elte.hu, greg@kroah.com, jeremy@goop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org, jkohen@users.sourceforge.net, akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@unsolicited.net Subject: Re: [stable] Soft lockups since stable kernel upgrade to 2.6.23.8 Message-ID: <20071120235245.GA4628@suse.de> References: <20071120203919.GB10008@elte.hu> <20071120210315.GC13160@kroah.com> <20071120214927.GB24156@elte.hu> <20071120.151538.68704351.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071120.151538.68704351.davem@davemloft.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 03:15:38PM -0800, David Miller wrote: > From: Ingo Molnar > Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 22:49:27 +0100 > > > > > * Greg KH wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 09:39:19PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > > > * Greg KH wrote: > > > > > > > > > > but we only have cpu_clock() from v2.6.23 onwards - so we should not > > > > > > apply the original patch to v2.6.22. (we should not have applied > > > > > > your patch that started the mess to begin with - but that's another > > > > > > matter.) > > > > > > > > > > Well, I can easily back that one out, if that is easier than adding 2 > > > > > more patches to try to fix up the mess here. > > > > > > > > > > Let me know if you feel that would be best. > > > > > > > > i'd leave it alone - doing that we have in essence the softlockup > > > > detector turned off. Reverting to the older version might trigger false > > > > positives that need the new stuff. > > > > > > Ok, I'll see if the current round of patches fix up everyone > > > complaints :) > > > > so just to reiterate, to make sure we have the same plans: lets leave > > v2.6.22 and earlier kernels alone - and lets strive for the latest > > patches and code for v2.6.23 (and v2.6.24, evidently). > > I've validated that those patches make 2.6.23 behave on my > Niagara box. Great, thanks for testing and letting us know! greg k-h