[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <487B619B.20608@sgi.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 07:24:27 -0700
From: Mike Travis <travis@....com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 02/15] x86_64: Fold pda into per cpu area
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
...
>> Given that we have not yet understood the weird failure case. This patch needs
>> to be split in two.
>> - make the current per cpu variable section zero based.
>> - Move the pda into the per cpu variable section.
>>
>> There are too many variables at present the reported failure cases to
>> guess what is really going on.
>>
>> We can not optimize the per cpu variable accesses until the pda moves
>> but we can easily test for linker and tool chain bugs with zero
>> based pda segment itself.
>
> agreed, a patch of this gravity and with a diffstat:
>
> 12 files changed, 112 insertions(+), 142 deletions(-)
>
> is indeed too large. Test failures that get bisected to this patch will
> still cause people to guess about which aspect of the large patch caused
> the problem.
>
> Ingo
That split has been done and I've sent it to Jeremy and Peter for further
review.
Thanks,
Mike
--
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