[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071120170519.GB15954@kroah.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:05:19 -0800
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
David <david@...olicited.net>,
Javier Kohen <jkohen@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [stable] Soft lockups since stable kernel upgrade to 2.6.23.8
On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 07:05:25AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:
>
> > Greg KH wrote:
> > > Can you try applying the patch below to see if that solves the problem
> > > for you?
> > >
> >
> > I don't think this patch will help; it only has cosmetic changes in
> > addition to the original message printing fix. I think it also needs
> > change a3b13c23f186ecb57204580cc1f2dbe9c284953a:
> >
> > diff -r 79f0ea1e0e70 -r 06f060ab58aa kernel/softlockup.c
>
> yes, it does need the cpu_clock() changes as i mentioned.
>
> commit a3b13c23f186ecb57204580cc1f2dbe9c284953a
> Author: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> Date: Tue Oct 16 23:26:06 2007 -0700
>
> softlockup: use cpu_clock() instead of sched_clock()
>
> sched_clock() is not a reliable time-source, use cpu_clock() instead.
>
> but we only have cpu_clock() from v2.6.23 onwards - so we should not
> apply the original patch to v2.6.22. (we should not have applied your
> patch that started the mess to begin with - but that's another matter.)
Well, I can easily back that one out, if that is easier than adding 2
more patches to try to fix up the mess here.
Let me know if you feel that would be best.
thanks,
greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists