From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751002AbdE1Ivx (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Sun, 28 May 2017 04:51:53 -0400
Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com ([74.125.82.65]:35774 "EHLO
        mail-wm0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1750841AbdE1Ivw (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Sun, 28 May 2017 04:51:52 -0400
Date: Sun, 28 May 2017 10:51:47 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, LKP <lkp@01.org>
Subject: Re: [x86/mm] e2a7dcce31: kernel_BUG_at_arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
Message-ID: <20170528085147.dazpglz4my6o7isg@gmail.com>
References: <20170527133113.GA33229@inn.lkp.intel.com>
 <CALCETrX71xoZN2MsPVm+zMg9XrrUyMz6bzfLn3B9Vs0cTnegQA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrX71xoZN2MsPVm+zMg9XrrUyMz6bzfLn3B9Vs0cTnegQA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


* Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote:

> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 6:31 AM, kernel test robot
> <xiaolong.ye@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > FYI, we noticed the following commit:
> >
> > commit: e2a7dcce31f10bd7471b4245a6d1f2de344e7adf ("x86/mm: Rework lazy TLB to track the actual loaded mm")
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/luto/linux.git x86/tlbflush_cleanup
> 
> Ugh, there's an unpleasant interaction between this patch and
> intel_idle.  I suspect that the intel_idle code in question is either
> wrong or pointless, but I want to investigate further.  Ingo, can you
> hold off on applying this patch?

Yeah, will wait for the next iteration of your series.

Thanks,

	Ingo