[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D52E162.5030308@goop.org>
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 10:48:02 -0800
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>
CC: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>, Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@...rix.com>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix jiffy calculations in calibrate_delay_direct to
handle overflow
On 02/09/2011 05:18 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 09.02.11 at 10:53, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz> wrote:
>> On 02/09/2011 10:44 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 09.02.11 at 10:21, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz> wrote:
>>>> On 02/09/2011 09:31 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> Fixes a hang when booting as dom0 under Xen, when jiffies can be
>>>>> quite large by the time the kernel init gets this far.
>>>> As I wrote this might happen if the boot till this point takes ~ 5
>>>> minutes because we start at -5 minutes.
>>>>
>>>> That said, is this a candidate for stable? (If so, please CC stable.)
>>> Honestly, I'm not certain (given that mainline Xen Dom0 support
>>> is still only in its beginnings).
>> What about other VMs? If I run few non-kvm qemu VMs (kvm presets lpj) on
>> a busy dual-core machine, this will be a problem too, right?
> Yes, quite possible indeed.
Seems like stable material since it 1) has fixed a real bug, and 2) is
the right way to do things anyway. It just hasn't been seen to fix a
bug in a stable kernel, so perhaps not. If it were any more complex
then wouldn't push it.
J
--
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