[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141217171404.GD30905@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 18:14:04 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: frequent lockups in 3.18rc4
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 12:01:39PM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > Linus, do you have a pointer to whatever version of the patch you tried?
>
> The patch was this:
>
> a) http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1835331
>
> Then Jurgen had a patch:
> https://lkml.kernel.org/g/CA+55aFxSRujj=cM1NkXYvxmo=Y1hb1e3tgLhdh1JDphzV6WKRw@mail.gmail.com
> which was one fix for one bug that ended up being fixed in QEMU - so
> it can be ignored.
>
> But my understanding of that thread was that it said patch 'a)' did not
> fix Dave's issues - and the conversation went off on NMI watchdog?
>
> I will look up the giant thread to make sense.
No, you're right in that the patch didn't solve the issue at hand and
that the conversation moved on into a different direction.
But I would very much like to see it (or something very much like it)
happen, because it does make the code much saner.
--
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