| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 19:47:06 +0100 From: Damien Wyart <damien.wyart@...il.com> To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org, peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...nel.org, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: fix env->src_cpu for active migration * Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org> [2013-02-13 18:49]: > I have look into Frederic's tree but i didn't find any reason that > could explain your problem. May be Frederic will have some ideas > I have also tested his branch with and without my patch and both > kernel are booting (on an ARM platform without using the full_nohz > feature ). I have faced a conflict when i have applied my patch on his > branch as we insert code at the same place. You should have faced the > same conflict. How have you solved it ? Bingo, that was the problem in my setup: as the patch was applied through a script with others, I had missed the error message about the conflict (I have also another conflict which can be safely ignored so the new one did not catch my eye)... So the patch was only half-applied, and the final code is broken. How did you solve the conflict (I am not a scheduler expert)? I can retry running the patched kernel with your resolution, to check if everything is ok. Thanks and sorry for this, -- Damien -- 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