On 22/07/2019 09:49, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 19.07.2019 19:55, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 16/07/2019 17:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> As an observation, I wonder whether continually sprinkling
>> process_pending_softirqs() is the best thing to do for keyhandlers.
>> We've got a number of other which
On 19.07.2019 19:55, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 16/07/2019 17:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> When there are sufficiently many devices listed in the ACPI tables (no
>> matter if they actually exist), output may take way longer than the
>> watchdog would like.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich
>> ---
>>
On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 04:41:21PM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> When there are sufficiently many devices listed in the ACPI tables (no
> matter if they actually exist), output may take way longer than the
> watchdog would like.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich
Acked-by: Brian Woods
> ---
> v3:
On 16/07/2019 17:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
> When there are sufficiently many devices listed in the ACPI tables (no
> matter if they actually exist), output may take way longer than the
> watchdog would like.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich
> ---
> v3: New.
> ---
> TBD: Seeing the volume of output I
When there are sufficiently many devices listed in the ACPI tables (no
matter if they actually exist), output may take way longer than the
watchdog would like.
Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich
---
v3: New.
---
TBD: Seeing the volume of output I wonder whether we should further
suppress logging
