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 S1752746AbcAGKtj (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 7 Jan 2016 05:49:39 -0500
Received: from mail-wm0-f50.google.com ([74.125.82.50]:35744 "EHLO
	mail-wm0-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751905AbcAGKtg (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 7 Jan 2016 05:49:36 -0500
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] clocksource/vt8500: Fix hangs in small delays
To: Roman Volkov <v1ron@mail.ru>
References: <1451654683-2401-1-git-send-email-v1ron@mail.ru>
 <568D2387.4060708@linaro.org> <20160106183038.7e600409@v1ron-s7>
Cc: arm@kernel.org, linux+armsoc@arm.linux.org.uk,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Alexey Charkov <alchark@gmail.com>,
        Roman Volkov <rvolkov@v1ros.org>, Tony Prisk <linux@prisktech.co.nz>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Message-ID: <568E42BC.5030608@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 11:49:32 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160106183038.7e600409@v1ron-s7>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 01/06/2016 04:30 PM, Roman Volkov wrote:
> В Wed, 6 Jan 2016 15:24:07 +0100
> Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> пишет:
>
>> On 01/01/2016 02:24 PM, Roman Volkov wrote:
>>> From: Roman Volkov <rvolkov@v1ros.org>
>>>
>>> vt8500 hangs in nanosleep() function, starting from commit
>>> c6eb3f70d4482806dc2d3e1e3c7736f497b1d418, making the system
>>> unusable. Per investigation, looks like set_next_event() now
>>> receives too small delta and fails with -ETIME.
>>
>>
>> Hi Roman,
>>
>> I think the patch 1/3 should go as a fix for 4.4-rc7 and stable and
>> the two other should go for the next version as they are improvements
>> regarding the current code.
>>
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> I agree, -stable can live without the patches 2 an 3.

Ok, I applied patch 1 for fix/urgent + stable and 2/3 for the next release.

-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog