On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:57:48AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:53:10PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:58:17PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 01:46:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 09,
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:57:48AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:53:10PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:58:17PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 01:46:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 09,
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 02:00:02PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:57:48AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:53:10PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:58:17PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Mar 13,
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 02:00:02PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:57:48AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:53:10PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:58:17PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Mar 13,
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:53:10PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:58:17PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 01:46:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:37:32AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > And it does pass
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:53:10PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:58:17PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 01:46:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:37:32AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > And it does pass
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:58:17PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 01:46:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:37:32AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > And it does pass light testing. I will hammer it harder this evening.
> > >
> > > So
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:58:17PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 01:46:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:37:32AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > And it does pass light testing. I will hammer it harder this evening.
> > >
> > > So
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 01:46:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:37:32AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > And it does pass light testing. I will hammer it harder this evening.
> >
> > So please send a formal patch!
>
> Changed it a bit...
>
> ---
> Subject:
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 01:46:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:37:32AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > And it does pass light testing. I will hammer it harder this evening.
> >
> > So please send a formal patch!
>
> Changed it a bit...
>
> ---
> Subject:
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 08:55:21AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 01:46:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:37:32AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > And it does pass light testing. I will hammer it harder this evening.
> > >
> > > So
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 08:55:21AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 01:46:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:37:32AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > And it does pass light testing. I will hammer it harder this evening.
> > >
> > > So
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 01:46:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:37:32AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > And it does pass light testing. I will hammer it harder this evening.
> >
> > So please send a formal patch!
>
> Changed it a bit...
>
> ---
> Subject:
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 01:46:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:37:32AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > And it does pass light testing. I will hammer it harder this evening.
> >
> > So please send a formal patch!
>
> Changed it a bit...
>
> ---
> Subject:
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:37:32AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> And it does pass light testing. I will hammer it harder this evening.
>
> So please send a formal patch!
Changed it a bit...
---
Subject: sched/clock: Some clear_sched_clock_stable() vs hotplug wobbles
Paul reported two
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:37:32AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> And it does pass light testing. I will hammer it harder this evening.
>
> So please send a formal patch!
Changed it a bit...
---
Subject: sched/clock: Some clear_sched_clock_stable() vs hotplug wobbles
Paul reported two
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:37:32AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 07:31:14AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 04:24:20PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 01:53:06PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > The v4.11-rc1
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:37:32AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 07:31:14AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 04:24:20PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 01:53:06PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > The v4.11-rc1
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 07:31:14AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 04:24:20PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 01:53:06PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > The v4.11-rc1 kernel emits the following splat in some configurations:
> > >
> > > [
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 07:31:14AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 04:24:20PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 01:53:06PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > The v4.11-rc1 kernel emits the following splat in some configurations:
> > >
> > > [
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 04:24:20PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 01:53:06PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > The v4.11-rc1 kernel emits the following splat in some configurations:
> >
> > [ 43.681891] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible []
> > code:
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 04:24:20PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 01:53:06PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > The v4.11-rc1 kernel emits the following splat in some configurations:
> >
> > [ 43.681891] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible []
> > code:
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 01:53:06PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> The v4.11-rc1 kernel emits the following splat in some configurations:
>
> [ 43.681891] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [] code:
> kworker/3:1/49
> [ 43.682511] caller is debug_smp_processor_id+0x17/0x20
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 01:53:06PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> The v4.11-rc1 kernel emits the following splat in some configurations:
>
> [ 43.681891] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [] code:
> kworker/3:1/49
> [ 43.682511] caller is debug_smp_processor_id+0x17/0x20
The v4.11-rc1 kernel emits the following splat in some configurations:
[ 43.681891] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [] code:
kworker/3:1/49
[ 43.682511] caller is debug_smp_processor_id+0x17/0x20
[ 43.682893] CPU: 0 PID: 49 Comm: kworker/3:1 Not tainted 4.11.0-rc1+ #1
The v4.11-rc1 kernel emits the following splat in some configurations:
[ 43.681891] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [] code:
kworker/3:1/49
[ 43.682511] caller is debug_smp_processor_id+0x17/0x20
[ 43.682893] CPU: 0 PID: 49 Comm: kworker/3:1 Not tainted 4.11.0-rc1+ #1
26 matches
Mail list logo