[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150305005424.GA21715@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2015 01:54:24 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
patches@...aro.org, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@...bosch.com>,
Daniel Drake <drake@...lessm.com>,
Dmitry Pervushin <dpervushin@...il.com>,
Tim Sander <tim@...eglstein.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.0-rc1 v17 5/6] x86/nmi: Use common printk functions
* Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org> wrote:
> Much of the code sitting in arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c to support
> safe all-cpu backtracing from NMI has been copied to printk.c to
> make it accessible to other architectures.
>
> Port the x86 NMI backtrace to the generic code.
Is there any difference between the generic and the x86 code as they
stand today?
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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