On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 01:26:11PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> When a CPU is finally put down in either CPU_UP_CANCELLED or
> CPU_POST_DEAD, cpu_stop_cpu_callback() signals immediate completion on
> all cpu_stop_works still queued on the dead CPU; unfortunately, this
> code is buggy in that it doe
Hello, again.
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 11:42:43AM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> As checked with BUG_ON in the case of CPU_UP_PREPARE, we have to dequeue
> work first for further actions, then stopper reaches sane and clear state.
When a CPU is finally put down in either CPU_UP_CANCELLED or
CPU_POST
Hello Namhyung
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2013 11:42:43 +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
>> As checked with BUG_ON in the case of CPU_UP_PREPARE, we have to dequeue
>> work first for further actions, then stopper reaches sane and clear state.
>
> Reviewed-by: Na
On Fri, 8 Feb 2013 11:42:43 +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> As checked with BUG_ON in the case of CPU_UP_PREPARE, we have to dequeue
> work first for further actions, then stopper reaches sane and clear state.
Reviewed-by: Namhyung Kim
Thanks,
Namhyung
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the lin
4 matches
Mail list logo