On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:39:37AM +0800, 陈华才 wrote:
> So I still think that "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()"
> should be reverted in 3.5 branch...
3.5 is now end-of-life, with no more releases, everyone should have
moved off of it to 3.6 now, so there's nothing to do here
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:39:37AM +0800, 陈华才 wrote:
So I still think that sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()
should be reverted in 3.5 branch...
3.5 is now end-of-life, with no more releases, everyone should have
moved off of it to 3.6 now, so there's nothing to do here anymore.
So I still think that "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()"
should be reverted in 3.5 branch...
> On 10/06/2012 01:23 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 10:10 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>>> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg
So I still think that sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()
should be reverted in 3.5 branch...
On 10/06/2012 01:23 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 10:10 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On 10/06/2012 01:23 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 10:10 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not?
So I think the current v3.5.5
On 10/05/2012 09:39 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
I can't find wtf went wrong either, the initial patch 5167e8d5417bf5c
contains both hunks, but in that case the fixup 749c8814f0 doesn't make
sense, not can I find anything in merge commits using:
git log -S
On 10/05/2012 09:39 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
I can't find wtf went wrong either, the initial patch 5167e8d5417bf5c
contains both hunks, but in that case the fixup 749c8814f0 doesn't make
sense, not can I find anything in merge commits using:
git log -S
On 10/06/2012 01:23 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 10:10 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not?
So I think the current v3.5.5
On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 10:10 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>
> >> I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not?
> >
> > So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine.
>
> Now I'm puzzled.
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not?
>
> So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine.
Now I'm puzzled. You wrote:
| However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be
On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 12:21:06PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not?
>
> So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine. I'm just not smart enough to
> figure out how 3.6
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not?
So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine. I'm just not smart enough to
figure out how 3.6 got fuzzed, this git thing is confusing as hell.
--
To unsubscribe from
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not?
So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine. I'm just not smart enough to
figure out how 3.6 got fuzzed, this git thing is confusing as hell.
--
To unsubscribe from
On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 12:21:06PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not?
So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine. I'm just not smart enough to
figure out how 3.6 got
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not?
So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine.
Now I'm puzzled. You wrote:
| However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be sampling
On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 10:10 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
I'm puzzled as well. Any ideas if I should do anything here or not?
So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine.
Now I'm puzzled. You wrote:
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I can't find wtf went wrong either, the initial patch 5167e8d5417bf5c
> contains both hunks, but in that case the fixup 749c8814f0 doesn't make
> sense, not can I find anything in merge commits using:
>
> git log -S calc_load_exit_idle kernel/time/tick-sched.c
git log
My opinion: The original patch "sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg
computation -- again" is designed for 3.5-branch and calc_load_exit_idle()
is called directly in tick_nohz_idle_exit(). So, the patch can be fully
applied in 3.5 and doesn't need to fix (Add the missing call), but not
fully
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 08:31:59PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 10:46 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 12:11:01PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote:
> > > Hi, Greg
> > >
> > > I found that Linux-3.5.5 accept this commit "sched: Add missing call
> > > to
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 10:46 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 12:11:01PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote:
> > Hi, Greg
> >
> > I found that Linux-3.5.5 accept this commit "sched: Add missing call
> > to calc_load_exit_idle()" but I think this isn't needed. Because
> >
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 12:11:01PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote:
> Hi, Greg
>
> I found that Linux-3.5.5 accept this commit "sched: Add missing call
> to calc_load_exit_idle()" but I think this isn't needed. Because
> "5167e8d5417b sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation --
> again not fully
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 12:11:01PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote:
Hi, Greg
I found that Linux-3.5.5 accept this commit sched: Add missing call
to calc_load_exit_idle() but I think this isn't needed. Because
5167e8d5417b sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation --
again not fully applied
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 10:46 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 12:11:01PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote:
Hi, Greg
I found that Linux-3.5.5 accept this commit sched: Add missing call
to calc_load_exit_idle() but I think this isn't needed. Because
5167e8d5417b
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 08:31:59PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 10:46 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 12:11:01PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote:
Hi, Greg
I found that Linux-3.5.5 accept this commit sched: Add missing call
to
My opinion: The original patch sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg
computation -- again is designed for 3.5-branch and calc_load_exit_idle()
is called directly in tick_nohz_idle_exit(). So, the patch can be fully
applied in 3.5 and doesn't need to fix (Add the missing call), but not
fully applied
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
I can't find wtf went wrong either, the initial patch 5167e8d5417bf5c
contains both hunks, but in that case the fixup 749c8814f0 doesn't make
sense, not can I find anything in merge commits using:
git log -S calc_load_exit_idle kernel/time/tick-sched.c
git log -m -p
26 matches
Mail list logo
