From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755192AbZKBO7q (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2009 09:59:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754442AbZKBO7p (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2009 09:59:45 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:34131 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752516AbZKBO7o (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2009 09:59:44 -0500 Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 15:59:38 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Suresh Siddha Cc: "ebiederm@xmission.com" , "hpa@zytor.com" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "garyhade@us.ibm.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [patch 0/6] x86: cleanups and fixes for irq migration code during cpu offline Message-ID: <20091102145938.GD23776@elte.hu> References: <20091026222430.313656103@sbs-t61.sc.intel.com> <1256930729.2679.10.camel@sbs-t61.sc.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1256930729.2679.10.camel@sbs-t61.sc.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Suresh Siddha wrote: > On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 15:24 -0700, Siddha, Suresh B wrote: > > First four patches in the series unify the fixup_irqs() along with > > couple of cleanups. It also fixes an issue where the interrupt subsystem can > > point the interrupt to the offlined cpu (for non interrupt-remapping case) > > causing the device to not work. This was observed by Gary. > > > > These four patches are ready for inclusion > > Ingo, if no one has any objections, can you please consider the first > four patches in this patchset for -tip testing? Yep, queued them up. I went for the whole batch as it looks good and needs wider testing as well. Note, i fixed a few small details in patch #5. Note #2, the signoffs from Gary looked weird - they were put last while the patches did not come from him. I changed those to Acked-by - i suppose that was the intention, right? Ingo