[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <614d5d69-cfbb-59e8-2d63-ebc00705b82a@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 22:37:14 -0500
From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"Charles (Chas) Williams" <ciwillia@...cade.com>,
"M. Vefa Bicakci" <m.v.b@...box.com>,
Alok Kataria <akataria@...are.com>,
xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>,
Juergen Groß <jgross@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/smpboot: Make logical package management more robust
On 12/09/2016 06:00 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Dec 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>> On 12/09/2016 05:06 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Thu, 8 Dec 2016, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>>
>>> Boris, can you please verify if that makes the
>>> topology_update_package_map() call which you placed into the Xen cpu
>>> starting code obsolete ?
>>
>> Will do. I did test your patch but without removing
>> topology_update_package_map() call. It complained about package IDs
>> being wrong, but that's expected until I fix Xen part.
>
> That should not longer be the case as I changed the approach to that
> management thing.
I didn't notice this email before I sent the earlier message.
Is these anything else besides this patch that I should use? I applied
it to Linus tree and it didn't apply cleanly (there was some fuzz and
such) so I wonder whether I am missing something.
-boris
Powered by blists - more mailing lists