[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131126185847.GE789@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 19:58:47 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...il.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 4/6] ia64: Use preempt_schedule_irq
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 10:37:59AM -0800, Tony Luck wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 5:30 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 21 Nov 2013, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >>> Anyway, I don't object to the patch per se, but it might bloat a few
> >>> !ia64 kernels for having to carry the extra text.
> >
> > I tried it out ... if does fix both build & boot for ia64 with
> > PREMPT=n and PREMPT=y
> >
> > Tested-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
>
> So - are we going with this patch? Or still thinking of something better?
I queued it; let me prod Ingo (again) into actually merging it.
--
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