[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1410799463.28990.326.camel@misato.fc.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 10:44:23 -0600
From: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>
To: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>
Cc: Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, bp@...en8.de,
gong.chen@...ux.intel.com, tony.luck@...el.com, x86@...nel.org,
imammedo@...hat.com, huawei.libin@...wei.com,
paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, peterz@...radead.org,
Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...ux.intel.com>,
Linn Crosetto <linn@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] x86,cpu-hotplug: assign same CPU number to readded
CPU
On Mon, 2014-09-15 at 06:25 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-09-11 at 16:21 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> > There is no response for two months since posting v4.
> > What can I do for pushing the patch to upstream?
>
> Looks to me like we have two patches floating about for more or less the
> same problem, this one, and...
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/7/29/159
>
> ..this one, which you reviewed, and HP both reviewed and tested.
>
> We seem to kinda stuck with Boris having said don't diddle the
> cpu_llc_shared_map, but HP/Intel saying that this map diddling fixes
> their explosions. If your alternative is preferred over diddling
> cpu_llc_shared_map, perhaps HP/Intel can test/confirm that their
> explosions stay gone?
Well, Boris mentioned later in his email:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/7/22/201
And I agree with his assessment that both patches make sense.
Thanks,
-Toshi
--
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