From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754655Ab0IMIzX (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Sep 2010 04:55:23 -0400 Received: from mail-ey0-f174.google.com ([209.85.215.174]:54980 "EHLO mail-ey0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754259Ab0IMIzV (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Sep 2010 04:55:21 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=q7mwqCZoDeAfsZ+UATTquCyBBsYEypruBEMrd+YN1mQv+rJ/ZnUuhjGsvDNlvvd/PJ /sakHCq5rkiim5sarGsbu59fFK8Myh4IsI6ULMjdCh3wrfOWXdfyGiw0ECa1K1zINVc5 wXJXluv+ceXUlD93yB7LnjXcV/GaFkAfJWLkY= Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 12:55:16 +0400 From: Cyrill Gorcunov To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Don Zickus , mingo@elte.hu, robert.richter@amd.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ying.huang@intel.com, ming.m.lin@intel.com, yinghai@kernel.org, andi@firstfloor.org, eranian@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3 v2] nmi perf fixes Message-ID: <20100913085515.GC5728@lenovo> References: <1283454469-1909-1-git-send-email-dzickus@redhat.com> <1284118900.402.35.camel@laptop> <1284125693.402.58.camel@laptop> <1284126770.402.60.camel@laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1284126770.402.60.camel@laptop> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 03:52:50PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: ... > That seems to be clear enough.. no idea where that extra NMI comes from. > Robert any clue? > ... For what is worth, I've tested amd turion box -- not affected. -- Cyrill