From: Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PULL] cpumask tree
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2009 08:09:46 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <495F8DCA.1060905@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090103160017.GA8920@elte.hu>
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
>> i suspect it's:
>>
>> | commit 2d22bd5e74519854458ad372a89006e65f45e628
>> | Author: Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>
>> | Date: Wed Dec 31 18:08:46 2008 -0800
>> |
>> | x86: cleanup remaining cpumask_t code in microcode_core.c
>>
>> as the microcode is loaded during CPU onlining.
>
> yep, that's the bad one. Should i revert it or do you have a safe fix in
> mind?
>
> Ingo
Probably revert for now. There are a few more following patches that also
use 'work_on_cpu' so a better (more global?) fix should be used.
Any thought on using a recursive lock for cpu-hotplug-lock? (At least for
get_online_cpus()?)
Thanks,
Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-03 16:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-01 1:19 [PULL] cpumask tree Rusty Russell
2009-01-02 20:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-02 20:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-02 23:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-03 19:38 ` [git pull] cpus4096 tree, part 3 Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 20:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-03 20:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 20:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-03 21:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-04 3:35 ` Rusty Russell
2009-01-04 4:28 ` Mike Travis
2009-01-03 21:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 22:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-03 22:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-05 1:14 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 1:16 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-26 19:00 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-26 19:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-26 19:30 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-26 20:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-26 20:44 ` Andrew Morton
[not found] ` <604427e00901261312w23a1f0f5y61fc5c6cc70297fb@mail.gmail.com>
2009-01-26 23:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-26 23:44 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-07 17:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 20:58 ` Mike Travis
2009-01-03 7:20 ` [PULL] cpumask tree Rusty Russell
2009-01-03 10:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 11:59 ` [PATCH] ia64: cpumask fix for is_affinity_mask_valid() Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 12:19 ` [PATCH] cpumask: convert RCU implementations, fix Ingo Molnar
2009-01-04 3:43 ` [PATCH] ia64: cpumask fix for is_affinity_mask_valid() Rusty Russell
2009-01-04 4:20 ` Mike Travis
2009-01-04 12:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 14:58 ` [PULL] cpumask tree Mike Travis
2009-01-03 15:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 15:31 ` Mike Travis
2009-01-03 15:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 15:52 ` Mike Travis
2009-01-03 16:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 16:09 ` Mike Travis [this message]
2009-01-03 16:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 16:48 ` Mike Travis
2009-01-03 17:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 18:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 18:14 ` Mike Travis
2009-01-03 0:23 ` Rusty Russell
2009-01-08 19:10 ` David Daney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=495F8DCA.1060905@sgi.com \
--to=travis@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox