[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080819092543.GD28713@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:25:43 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Justin Madru <jdm64@...ab.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Michal Januszewski <spock@...too.org>,
Antonino Daplas <adaplas@...il.com>, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl>,
Romano Giannetti <romano.giannetti@...il.com>,
Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>,
Jeremy Nickurak <kernel-bugs@...us.rifetech.com>
Subject: Re: Backport hr-tick fix into .25/.26
* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 02:31 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Justin Madru <jdm64@...ab.com> wrote:
> >
> > > This commit introduced the bug.
> > > commit 8f4d37ec073c17e2d4aa8851df5837d798606d6f
> > > sched: high-res preemption tick
> >
> > > And this one fixed it
> > >
> > > commit 31656519e132f6612584815f128c83976a9aaaef
> > > sched, x86: clean up hrtick implementation
> >
> > hm, the backport of 31656519 is a bit intrusive.
> >
> > find below is an (untested!) version of it - i havent even build-tested
> > it. Does it work for you? But this is Greg's call really.
> >
>
> It largely depends on all the new IPI stuff that went into 27 as well,
> so I'd be surprised if its easily backportable..
ah, i see. How about a simple patch then that disables hrtick [given
that it's now fixed .27 but the fix is too intrusive to backport]? Would
that be too risky for -stable?
Ingo
--
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