On 05/02/2014 04:37 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
* Fernando Lopez-Lezcano | 2014-04-26 11:29:04 [-0700]:
Saw this a moment ago (3.14.1 + rt1, Fedora 19 laptop - I think I
have seen something similar in 3.12.x-r):
Yes, you did: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/7/163
You did not test I've
On 05/02/2014 04:37 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
* Fernando Lopez-Lezcano | 2014-04-26 11:29:04 [-0700]:
Saw this a moment ago (3.14.1 + rt1, Fedora 19 laptop - I think I
have seen something similar in 3.12.x-r):
Yes, you did: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/7/163
You did not test I've
* Fernando Lopez-Lezcano | 2014-04-26 11:29:04 [-0700]:
>Saw this a moment ago (3.14.1 + rt1, Fedora 19 laptop - I think I
>have seen something similar in 3.12.x-r):
Yes, you did: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/7/163
You did not test I've sent. Care to do so?
>Apr 26 11:16:11 localhost kernel: [
On Fri, 2014-05-02 at 12:09 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> * Mike Galbraith | 2014-04-19 16:46:06 [+0200]:
>
> >Hi Sebastian,
> Hi Mike,
>
> >This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug.
> >
> >@@ -333,7 +449,7 @@ static int __ref _cpu_down(unsigned int
> >
* Mike Galbraith | 2014-04-21 05:31:18 [+0200]:
>Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch
>should be while (atomic_read(_todo))
Thanks, fixed up.
Sebastian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
* Mike Galbraith | 2014-04-19 16:46:06 [+0200]:
>Hi Sebastian,
Hi Mike,
>This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug.
>
>@@ -333,7 +449,7 @@ static int __ref _cpu_down(unsigned int
>/* CPU didn't die: tell everyone. Can't complain. */
>
* Mike Galbraith | 2014-04-19 16:46:06 [+0200]:
Hi Sebastian,
Hi Mike,
This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug.
@@ -333,7 +449,7 @@ static int __ref _cpu_down(unsigned int
/* CPU didn't die: tell everyone. Can't complain. */
* Mike Galbraith | 2014-04-21 05:31:18 [+0200]:
Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch
should be while (atomic_read(done.nr_todo))
Thanks, fixed up.
Sebastian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to
On Fri, 2014-05-02 at 12:09 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
* Mike Galbraith | 2014-04-19 16:46:06 [+0200]:
Hi Sebastian,
Hi Mike,
This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug.
@@ -333,7 +449,7 @@ static int __ref _cpu_down(unsigned int
/*
* Fernando Lopez-Lezcano | 2014-04-26 11:29:04 [-0700]:
Saw this a moment ago (3.14.1 + rt1, Fedora 19 laptop - I think I
have seen something similar in 3.12.x-r):
Yes, you did: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/7/163
You did not test I've sent. Care to do so?
Apr 26 11:16:11 localhost kernel: [
On Thu, 2014-05-01 at 14:42 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 01 May 2014 19:36:18 +0200
> Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> > Hah! I knew you were just hiding, you sneaky little SOB ;-)
>
> What's this from? A new bug that had all the patches applied? Or was
> this without one of the patches?
On Thu, 01 May 2014 19:36:18 +0200
Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:48 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:15:57 +0200
> > Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Another little bug. This
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:48 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:15:57 +0200
> Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > > > Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch
> > > > should be while
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:48 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:15:57 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch
should be
On Thu, 01 May 2014 19:36:18 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:48 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:15:57 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Thu, 2014-05-01 at 14:42 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Thu, 01 May 2014 19:36:18 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
Hah! I knew you were just hiding, you sneaky little SOB ;-)
What's this from? A new bug that had all the patches applied? Or was
this without one
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:48 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:15:57 +0200
> Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > > > Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch
> > > > should be while
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:15:57 +0200
Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> > > Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch
> > > should be while (atomic_read(_todo))
> > >
> > > @@ -647,7 +671,7 @@ int
I fired off a 100 iteration run on 64 core box. If it's still alive in
the morning, it should still be busy as hell.
-Mike
--
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
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch
> > should be while (atomic_read(_todo))
> >
> > @@ -647,7 +671,7 @@ int stop_machine_from_inactive_cpu(int (
> > ret = multi_cpu_stop();
> >
> >
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:54:46 +0200
Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 10:33 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:19:19 -0400
> > Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > > I'm testing it now. But could you please post them as regular patches.
> > > They were attachments to
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 10:33 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:19:19 -0400
> Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> > I'm testing it now. But could you please post them as regular patches.
> > They were attachments to this thread, and were not something that stood
> > out.
>
> With your
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 10:19 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:00:03 +0200
> Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 09:15 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:06:29 +0200
> > > Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > The End.. I hope.
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:19:19 -0400
Steven Rostedt wrote:
> I'm testing it now. But could you please post them as regular patches.
> They were attachments to this thread, and were not something that stood
> out.
With your two patches, it still crashes exactly the same way. I
probably should
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:00:03 +0200
Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 09:15 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:06:29 +0200
> > Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >
> >
> > > The End.. I hope. I've had enough hotplug entertainment for a while.
> >
> > Not for me.
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 09:15 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:06:29 +0200
> Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
>
> > The End.. I hope. I've had enough hotplug entertainment for a while.
>
> Not for me. 3.14-rt stress-cpu-hotplug crashes quickly. But it's a
> different issues than
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:06:29 +0200
Mike Galbraith wrote:
> The End.. I hope. I've had enough hotplug entertainment for a while.
Not for me. 3.14-rt stress-cpu-hotplug crashes quickly. But it's a
different issues than what my patch addressed. I'm still debugging it.
-- Steve
--
To
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 09:43 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-04-29 at 20:13 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 07:21:09 +0200
> > Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Seems that migrate_disable()
On Tue, 2014-04-29 at 20:13 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 07:21:09 +0200
> Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >
> > > > Seems that migrate_disable() must be called before taking the lock as
> > > > it is done in every
On Tue, 2014-04-29 at 20:13 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 07:21:09 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Seems that migrate_disable() must be called before taking the lock as
it is done in
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 09:43 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Tue, 2014-04-29 at 20:13 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 07:21:09 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Seems that
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:06:29 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
The End.. I hope. I've had enough hotplug entertainment for a while.
Not for me. 3.14-rt stress-cpu-hotplug crashes quickly. But it's a
different issues than what my patch addressed. I'm still debugging it.
--
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 09:15 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:06:29 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
The End.. I hope. I've had enough hotplug entertainment for a while.
Not for me. 3.14-rt stress-cpu-hotplug crashes quickly. But it's a
different
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:00:03 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 09:15 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:06:29 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
The End.. I hope. I've had enough hotplug entertainment for
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:19:19 -0400
Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org wrote:
I'm testing it now. But could you please post them as regular patches.
They were attachments to this thread, and were not something that stood
out.
With your two patches, it still crashes exactly the same way. I
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 10:19 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:00:03 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 09:15 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:06:29 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 10:33 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:19:19 -0400
Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org wrote:
I'm testing it now. But could you please post them as regular patches.
They were attachments to this thread, and were not something that stood
out.
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:54:46 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 10:33 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:19:19 -0400
Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org wrote:
I'm testing it now. But could you please post them as regular
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch
should be while (atomic_read(done.nr_todo))
@@ -647,7 +671,7 @@ int stop_machine_from_inactive_cpu(int (
ret = multi_cpu_stop(msdata);
I fired off a 100 iteration run on 64 core box. If it's still alive in
the morning, it should still be busy as hell.
-Mike
--
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
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:15:57 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch
should be while (atomic_read(done.nr_todo))
@@ -647,7 +671,7 @@ int
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:48 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:15:57 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch
should be
On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 07:21:09 +0200
Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> > > Seems that migrate_disable() must be called before taking the lock as
> > > it is done in every other location.
> >
> > And for tasklist_lock, seems you also MUST do
On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 07:21:09 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Seems that migrate_disable() must be called before taking the lock as
it is done in every other location.
And for tasklist_lock, seems you also
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > Seems that migrate_disable() must be called before taking the lock as
> > it is done in every other location.
>
> And for tasklist_lock, seems you also MUST do that prior to trylock as
> well, else you'll run afoul of the hotplug
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 10:18 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Mon, 28 Apr 2014 11:09:46 +0200
> > Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >
> > > migrate_disable-pushd-down-in-atomic_dec_and_spin_lo.patch
> > >
> > > bug: migrate_disable() after
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 10:18 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Apr 2014 11:09:46 +0200
> Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> > migrate_disable-pushd-down-in-atomic_dec_and_spin_lo.patch
> >
> > bug: migrate_disable() after blocking is too late.
> >
> > @@ -1028,12 +1028,12 @@ int
On Mon, 28 Apr 2014 11:09:46 +0200
Mike Galbraith wrote:
> migrate_disable-pushd-down-in-atomic_dec_and_spin_lo.patch
>
> bug: migrate_disable() after blocking is too late.
>
> @@ -1028,12 +1028,12 @@ int atomic_dec_and_spin_lock(atomic_t *a
> /* Subtract 1 from counter unless that
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 07:09 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Hi Nicholas,
>
> On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 15:58 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 10:38 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 09:40 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hotplug can still
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 07:09 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Hi Nicholas,
On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 15:58 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 10:38 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 09:40 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Hotplug can still deadlock in rt
On Mon, 28 Apr 2014 11:09:46 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
migrate_disable-pushd-down-in-atomic_dec_and_spin_lo.patch
bug: migrate_disable() after blocking is too late.
@@ -1028,12 +1028,12 @@ int atomic_dec_and_spin_lock(atomic_t *a
/* Subtract 1 from
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 10:18 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Mon, 28 Apr 2014 11:09:46 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
migrate_disable-pushd-down-in-atomic_dec_and_spin_lo.patch
bug: migrate_disable() after blocking is too late.
@@ -1028,12 +1028,12 @@ int
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 10:18 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Mon, 28 Apr 2014 11:09:46 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
migrate_disable-pushd-down-in-atomic_dec_and_spin_lo.patch
bug: migrate_disable()
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Seems that migrate_disable() must be called before taking the lock as
it is done in every other location.
And for tasklist_lock, seems you also MUST do that prior to trylock as
well, else you'll run afoul of the hotplug beast.
Hi Nicholas,
On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 15:58 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 10:38 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 09:40 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >
> > > Hotplug can still deadlock in rt trees too, and will if you beat it
> > > hard.
> >
> > Box
Hi Nicholas,
On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 15:58 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 10:38 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 09:40 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Hotplug can still deadlock in rt trees too, and will if you beat it
hard.
Box actually
On 04/11/2014 11:57 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
Dear RT folks!
I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch setty).
Changes since v3.12.15-rt25
- I dropped the sparc64 patches I had in the queue. They did not apply
cleanly, the code in v3.14 changed in the MMU area. Here is where I
On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 10:38 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 09:40 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> > Hotplug can still deadlock in rt trees too, and will if you beat it
> > hard.
>
> Box actually deadlocks like so.
...
3.12-rt looks a bit busted migrate_disable/enable()
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 09:40 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Hotplug can still deadlock in rt trees too, and will if you beat it
> hard.
Box actually deadlocks like so.
CPU3 boot.kdump
sys_wait4
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 09:40 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Hotplug can still deadlock in rt trees too, and will if you beat it
hard.
Box actually deadlocks like so.
CPU3 boot.kdump
sys_wait4
On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 10:38 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 09:40 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Hotplug can still deadlock in rt trees too, and will if you beat it
hard.
Box actually deadlocks like so.
...
3.12-rt looks a bit busted migrate_disable/enable() wise.
On 04/11/2014 11:57 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
Dear RT folks!
I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch setty).
Changes since v3.12.15-rt25
- I dropped the sparc64 patches I had in the queue. They did not apply
cleanly, the code in v3.14 changed in the MMU area. Here is where I
On Sat, 2014-04-19 at 16:46 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Hi Sebastian,
>
> On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > Dear RT folks!
> >
> > I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set.
>
> This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug.
>
On Sat, 2014-04-19 at 16:46 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Hi Sebastian,
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
Dear RT folks!
I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set.
This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug.
@@ -333,7
On Thu, 2014-04-24 at 09:12 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 04/24/2014 06:06 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > Turning lockdep on, it says it's busted.
>
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rt-users/msg11179.html
I was heading toward the same conclusion while regression testing.
Guess
On 04/24/2014 06:06 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Turning lockdep on, it says it's busted.
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rt-users/msg11179.html
Sebastian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More
On 04/24/2014 06:06 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Turning lockdep on, it says it's busted.
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rt-users/msg11179.html
Sebastian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More
On Thu, 2014-04-24 at 09:12 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
On 04/24/2014 06:06 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Turning lockdep on, it says it's busted.
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rt-users/msg11179.html
I was heading toward the same conclusion while regression testing.
Guess I
Turning lockdep on, it says it's busted.
(I'll go stare at it, maybe the beast will blink first for a change)
[0.00] Lock dependency validator: Copyright (c) 2006 Red Hat, Inc.,
Ingo Molnar
[0.00] ... MAX_LOCKDEP_SUBCLASSES: 8
[0.00] ... MAX_LOCK_DEPTH: 48
[
On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 12:37:05 +0200
Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>
> > This -RT series didn't crashed within ~4h testing on my ARM and
> > x86-32.
> > x86-64 crashed after I started hackbench. I figured out that the crash
> > does
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> This -RT series didn't crashed within ~4h testing on my ARM and
> x86-32.
> x86-64 crashed after I started hackbench. I figured out that the crash
> does not happen with lazy-preempt disabled. Therefore the last but one
> patch
Turning lockdep on, it says it's busted.
(I'll go stare at it, maybe the beast will blink first for a change)
[0.00] Lock dependency validator: Copyright (c) 2006 Red Hat, Inc.,
Ingo Molnar
[0.00] ... MAX_LOCKDEP_SUBCLASSES: 8
[0.00] ... MAX_LOCK_DEPTH: 48
[
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
This -RT series didn't crashed within ~4h testing on my ARM and
x86-32.
x86-64 crashed after I started hackbench. I figured out that the crash
does not happen with lazy-preempt disabled. Therefore the last but one
patch in
On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 12:37:05 +0200
Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
This -RT series didn't crashed within ~4h testing on my ARM and
x86-32.
x86-64 crashed after I started hackbench. I figured out that the
On Sat, 2014-04-19 at 16:46 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Hi Sebastian,
>
> On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > Dear RT folks!
> >
> > I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set.
>
> This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug.
>
On Sat, 2014-04-19 at 16:46 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Hi Sebastian,
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
Dear RT folks!
I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set.
This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug.
@@ -333,7
Hi Sebastian,
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> Dear RT folks!
>
> I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set.
This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug.
@@ -333,7 +449,7 @@ static int __ref _cpu_down(unsigned int
Hi Sebastian,
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
Dear RT folks!
I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set.
This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug.
@@ -333,7 +449,7 @@ static int __ref _cpu_down(unsigned int
11.04.2014 22:57, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior пишет:
Dear RT folks!
I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set.
Hray!
--
Pavel.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the
Dear RT folks!
I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set.
Changes since v3.12.15-rt25
- I dropped the sparc64 patches I had in the queue. They did not apply
cleanly, the code in v3.14 changed in the MMU area. Here is where I
remembered that it was not working perfectly either.
- Scott
Dear RT folks!
I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set.
Changes since v3.12.15-rt25
- I dropped the sparc64 patches I had in the queue. They did not apply
cleanly, the code in v3.14 changed in the MMU area. Here is where I
remembered that it was not working perfectly either.
- Scott
11.04.2014 22:57, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior пишет:
Dear RT folks!
I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set.
Hray!
--
Pavel.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body
82 matches
Mail list logo