linux-kernel - Re: [PULL] cpumask tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090102203839.GA26850@elte.hu>
Date:	Fri, 2 Jan 2009 21:38:40 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Mike Travis <travis@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PULL] cpumask tree

* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 1 Jan 2009, Rusty Russell wrote:
> >
> > OK, this is the bulk of the conversion to the new cpumask operators. 
> > The x86-specific parts (the most aggressive large-NR_CPUS arch) are 
> > going via Ingo's tree.
> 
> This gets lots of conflicts for me. Some of them look simple enough, but 
> not all. io_apic.c gets lots of nasty conflicts, and it _looks_ like I 
> should just pick the version of the file that I already have (because 
> the only thing that comes in from that is yet another merge commit), but 
> kernel/sched.c also gets conflicts in areas with FIXME's etc.
> 
> Rusty, Ingo, can you work this out? I pushed out my current tree.

yes, we have those conflicts all resolved already in the second phase of 
the tip/cpus4096 changes: Mike did all those difficult conflict 
resolutions over the hollidays and i pulled it yesterday.

The end result looks nice as a tree but it is not fully cooked yet: since 
i pulled yesterday i found a couple of build and runtime test failures 
with Rusty's latest cpumask tree:

 - architectures that have no __fls (8 out of 21) fail to build:

     arch/cris
     arch/frv
     arch/h8300
     arch/m32r
     arch/m68k
     arch/mn10300
     arch/xtensa

 - there's a new circular locking lockdep splat in CPU hotplug tests when
   the var-cpumask code is enabled. (needs a handful of default-off
   options enabled in the .config)

So i didnt want to push the second phase to you until those known bugs are 
sorted out - i think we need some more time for that - a day or two at 
most.

Linus, would you like to pull that, despite the pending regressions? Can 
send a pull request right away.

Rusty, would it be fine with you if we did all the remaining bits via 
tip/cpus4096? It's your tree and your bits and we wanted to send our 
remaining bits after your tree went to Linus but the conflict resolutions 
from Mike are valuable so i think we should reconsider the ordering.

All the commits you sent to Linus in this pull request are already 
included in tip/cpus4096, the conflicts that Linus hit are all non-trivial 
and Mike resolved them correctly and it merges cleanly with Linus's latest 
tree:

  earth4:~/tip> git pull   
  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rusty/linux-2.6-cpumask.git master
  From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rusty/linux-2.6-cpumask
   * branch            master     -> FETCH_HEAD
  Already up-to-date.

The pending diff is:

  108 files changed, 1442 insertions(+), 979 deletions(-)

which is pretty OK and straightforward.

With that Rusty and Mike has done 99% of the cpumask conversions, so the 
most difficult phase of the conversion should be dealt with in .29. Cool 
stuff.

	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/