[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFwhzMWR8QPGEK+8O8r0sFpHjn4XXraQ9K0Hq4VQi8Ru-w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 10:20:14 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, wanpeng.li@...mail.com,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"# .39.x" <stable@...nel.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: v4.10-rc8 (-rc6) boot regression on Intel desktop, does not boot
after cold boots, boots after reboot
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Frederic Weisbecker
<fweisbec@...il.com> wrote:
>
> I haven't followed the discussion but this patch has a known issue which is fixed
> with:
> 7bdb59f1ad474bd7161adc8f923cdef10f2638d1
> "tick/nohz: Fix possible missing clock reprog after tick soft restart"
>
> I hope this fixes your issue.
No, Pavel saw the problem with rc8 too, which already has that fix.
So I think we'll just need to revert that original patch (and that
means that we have to revert the commit you point to as well, since
that ->next_tick field was added by the original commit).
Pavel, can you verify that rc8 with both
24b91e360ef521a2808771633d76ebc68bd5604b
7bdb59f1ad474bd7161adc8f923cdef10f2638d1
reverted works reliably for you?
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists