On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Sasha Levin <sasha.le...@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> I've ran a bisection again and ended up at the same commit as Jet Chen (the
> commit
> unfortunately already made it to Linus's tree).
Ok, I'm going to revert that commit. The games it plays with cpu
numbers and preemption make me worried, and it looks silly.
If the only reason for that patch is interrupt latency, then if the
"preempt_disable()" had been done *before* restoring irq's, none of
those "let's reload the CPU number" games would have been necessary,
and the patch could have been smaller. So even if that is the solution
to the problems people report, it's actually *better* to just revert
the patch entirely, and try again with a smaller and simpler version,
rather than try to change the patch after-the-fact.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
