On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 04:10:59PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > > Hmmm... the only thing it can break is numa affinity of static percpu > > areas (it doesn't even affect that anymore), which didn't work at all > > on i386 before and keeps to not working for those exotic apic machines > > anyway. Silencing the warnings wouldn't hurt anything at all. If > > you're still concerned that something legitimate might trigger it, > > wouldn't converting WARN_ON() there to printk_once() be enough? That > > doesn't change the behavior at all sans lesser noise. > > That might be reasonable to do, yet I still think that changing what got > produced with by the older APIC driver to what the new one would have > produced when the driver gets changed is more consistent than just > printing something, until the method in question is gone altogether.
Sure, either seems fine to me. Please feel free to add my acked-by. Thanks. -- tejun _______________________________________________ stable mailing list [email protected] http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/stable
