On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 01:34:18AM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:53:40AM +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
> > Preemption must be disabled when calling smp_call_function_many,
> > get_cpu would did that. Will get_online_cpus have the same behavior
> > like that?
>
> Well,
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:53:40AM +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
> Preemption must be disabled when calling smp_call_function_many,
> get_cpu would did that. Will get_online_cpus have the same behavior
> like that?
Well, get_online_cpus() protects you against CPU hotplug operations in
general. If you
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:53:40AM +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
> Preemption must be disabled when calling smp_call_function_many,
> get_cpu would did that. Will get_online_cpus have the same behavior
> like that?
Well, get_online_cpus() protects you against CPU hotplug operations in
general. If you
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 01:34:18AM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:53:40AM +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
> > Preemption must be disabled when calling smp_call_function_many,
> > get_cpu would did that. Will get_online_cpus have the same behavior
> > like that?
>
> Well,
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 03:27:02PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:28:24AM +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
> > This patch adds a member in fam15h_power_data which specifies the
> > compute unit accumulated power. It adds do_read_registers_on_cu to do
> > all the read to all MSRs
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 03:27:02PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:28:24AM +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
> > This patch adds a member in fam15h_power_data which specifies the
> > compute unit accumulated power. It adds do_read_registers_on_cu to do
> > all the read to all MSRs
On 10/23/2015 06:27 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:28:24AM +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
This patch adds a member in fam15h_power_data which specifies the
compute unit accumulated power. It adds do_read_registers_on_cu to do
all the read to all MSRs and run it on one of the
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:28:24AM +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
> This patch adds a member in fam15h_power_data which specifies the
> compute unit accumulated power. It adds do_read_registers_on_cu to do
> all the read to all MSRs and run it on one of the online cores on each
> compute unit with
On 10/23/2015 06:27 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:28:24AM +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
This patch adds a member in fam15h_power_data which specifies the
compute unit accumulated power. It adds do_read_registers_on_cu to do
all the read to all MSRs and run it on one of the
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:28:24AM +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
> This patch adds a member in fam15h_power_data which specifies the
> compute unit accumulated power. It adds do_read_registers_on_cu to do
> all the read to all MSRs and run it on one of the online cores on each
> compute unit with
Hi Jean,
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 08:05:20AM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Rui,
>
> On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 11:04:01 +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 07:49:53PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > On 10/20/2015 07:40 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
> > > >>>Thanks to report this issue. :)
> >
Hi Rui,
On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 11:04:01 +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 07:49:53PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On 10/20/2015 07:40 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
> > >>>Thanks to report this issue. :)
> > >>>The root cause is that the test config doesn't enable
> > >>>CONFIG_CPU_SUP_AMD.
Hi Rui,
On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 11:04:01 +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 07:49:53PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On 10/20/2015 07:40 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
> > >>>Thanks to report this issue. :)
> > >>>The root cause is that the test config doesn't enable
> > >>>CONFIG_CPU_SUP_AMD.
Hi Jean,
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 08:05:20AM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Rui,
>
> On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 11:04:01 +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 07:49:53PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > On 10/20/2015 07:40 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
> > > >>>Thanks to report this issue. :)
> >
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 07:49:53PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 10/20/2015 07:40 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
> >On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 07:15:25PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >>On 10/20/2015 06:42 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
> >>>On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 03:24:09PM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
> Hi
On 10/20/2015 07:40 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 07:15:25PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 10/20/2015 06:42 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 03:24:09PM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
Hi Huang,
[auto build test ERROR on hwmon/hwmon-next -- if it's inappropriate
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 07:15:25PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 10/20/2015 06:42 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
> >On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 03:24:09PM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
> >>Hi Huang,
> >>
> >>[auto build test ERROR on hwmon/hwmon-next -- if it's inappropriate base,
> >>please suggest rules
On 10/20/2015 06:42 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 03:24:09PM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
Hi Huang,
[auto build test ERROR on hwmon/hwmon-next -- if it's inappropriate base,
please suggest rules for selecting the more suitable base]
url:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 03:24:09PM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
> Hi Huang,
>
> [auto build test ERROR on hwmon/hwmon-next -- if it's inappropriate base,
> please suggest rules for selecting the more suitable base]
>
> url:
>
Hi Huang,
[auto build test ERROR on hwmon/hwmon-next -- if it's inappropriate base,
please suggest rules for selecting the more suitable base]
url:
https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Huang-Rui/hwmon-fam15h_power-Introduce-an-accumulated-power-reporting-algorithm/20151020-110712
Hi Huang,
[auto build test ERROR on hwmon/hwmon-next -- if it's inappropriate base,
please suggest rules for selecting the more suitable base]
url:
https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Huang-Rui/hwmon-fam15h_power-Introduce-an-accumulated-power-reporting-algorithm/20151020-110712
On 10/20/2015 06:42 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 03:24:09PM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
Hi Huang,
[auto build test ERROR on hwmon/hwmon-next -- if it's inappropriate base,
please suggest rules for selecting the more suitable base]
url:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 07:15:25PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 10/20/2015 06:42 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
> >On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 03:24:09PM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
> >>Hi Huang,
> >>
> >>[auto build test ERROR on hwmon/hwmon-next -- if it's inappropriate base,
> >>please suggest rules
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 07:49:53PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 10/20/2015 07:40 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
> >On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 07:15:25PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >>On 10/20/2015 06:42 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
> >>>On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 03:24:09PM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
> Hi
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 03:24:09PM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
> Hi Huang,
>
> [auto build test ERROR on hwmon/hwmon-next -- if it's inappropriate base,
> please suggest rules for selecting the more suitable base]
>
> url:
>
On 10/20/2015 07:40 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 07:15:25PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 10/20/2015 06:42 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 03:24:09PM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
Hi Huang,
[auto build test ERROR on hwmon/hwmon-next -- if it's inappropriate
This patch adds a member in fam15h_power_data which specifies the
compute unit accumulated power. It adds do_read_registers_on_cu to do
all the read to all MSRs and run it on one of the online cores on each
compute unit with smp_call_function_many(). This behavior can decrease
IPI numbers.
This patch adds a member in fam15h_power_data which specifies the
compute unit accumulated power. It adds do_read_registers_on_cu to do
all the read to all MSRs and run it on one of the online cores on each
compute unit with smp_call_function_many(). This behavior can decrease
IPI numbers.
28 matches
Mail list logo
