tip.git WIP.core/urgent
>
> That's based on 4.13 final so it neither contains 4.14 nor -next material.
Tested your changes on 4.14-rc3 and it passes my tests. Thanks!
Tested-and-Reviewed-by: Don Zickus <dzic...@redhat.com>
On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 07:32:57PM +, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2017, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Side note: would it perhaps make sense to have that
> > cpus_read_lock/unlock() sequence around the whole reconfiguration
> > section?
> >
> > Because while looking at that sequence,
hdog patches seem to go via Andrew...
Andrew, suggestions here?
Reviewed-by: Don Zickus <dzic...@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Don Zickus <dzic...@redhat.com>
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
>
> Nicholas Piggin (5):
> watchdog: remove unused declaration
> watchdog: introduc
On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 12:53:06AM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> > I am curious to know what IBM thinks there. Currently the HARDLOCKUP
> > detector sits on top of perf. I get the impression, you are removing that
> > dependency. Is that a permanent thing or are you thinking of switching back
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 09:07:31AM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> On Thu, 18 May 2017 12:30:28 -0400
> Don Zickus <dzic...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > (adding Uli)
> >
> > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 01:50:26AM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> > > I'd like to
(adding Uli)
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 01:50:26AM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> I'd like to make it easier for architectures that have their own NMI /
> hard lockup detector to reuse various configuration interfaces that are
> provided by generic detectors (cmdline, sysctl, suspend/resume calls).
