(dropping netdev and visws list)
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 18:00 +0100, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 04/06/2011 11:58 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >
> > I'm not sure why ELAN belongs in the EXTENDED_PLATFORM option space
> > rather than in the CPU choice option, since its only impact seems to be
> > on -ma
(dropping netdev and the visws list)
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 11:07 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 04/06/2011 11:58 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 22:45 +0100, David Miller wrote:
> >> From: Ian Campbell
> >> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 10:55:55 +0100
> >>
> >>> You mean the "!X
On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 03:49:58PM -0700, Haiyang Zhang wrote:
> From: Olaf Hering
>
> Locking is required when tweaking bits located in a shared page, use the
> sync_ version of bitops. Without this change vmbus_on_event() will miss
> events and as a result, vmbus_isr() will not schedule the rec
From: Olaf Hering
Locking is required when tweaking bits located in a shared page, use the
sync_ version of bitops. Without this change vmbus_on_event() will miss
events and as a result, vmbus_isr() will not schedule the receive tasklet.
Backported to 2.6.32 stable kernel by Haiyang Zhang
Sign
On 04/06/2011 11:58 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 22:45 +0100, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Ian Campbell
>> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 10:55:55 +0100
>>
>>> You mean the "!X86_VISWS" I presume? It doesn't make sense to me either.
>> No, I think 32-bit x86 allmodconfig elides XEN becau
The virtio balloon driver has a VIRTIO_BALLOON_F_MUST_TELL_HOST
feature bit. Whenever the bit is set, we must always tell the
host before we free pages back to the allocator. Without this
we might free a page (and have another user touch it) while the
hypervisor is unprepared for it.
But, if th
On 04/06/2011 11:58 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
>
> I'm not sure why ELAN belongs in the EXTENDED_PLATFORM option space
> rather than in the CPU choice option, since its only impact seems to be
> on -march, MODULE_PROC_FAMILY and some cpufreq drivers which doesn't
> sound like an extended platform to
On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 22:45 +0100, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ian Campbell
> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 10:55:55 +0100
>
> > You mean the "!X86_VISWS" I presume? It doesn't make sense to me either.
>
> No, I think 32-bit x86 allmodconfig elides XEN because of it's X86_TSC
> dependency.
TSC is a re