On 25/08/12 13:19, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 14:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 04:58:24PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Changes since v1: >>> >>> - Fixed preempt handling in alpha idle loop >>> - added ack from Geert >>> - fixed stable email address, sorry :-/ >>> >>> This time I built tested everywhere but: h8300 (compiler internal error), >>> and mn10300, parisc, score (cross compilers not available in >>> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/files/bin/x86_64/4.6.3/) >>> >>> For testing, you can pull from: >>> >>> git://github.com/fweisbec/linux-dynticks.git >>> rcu/idle-fix-v2 >>> >>> Thanks. >> >> I have queued these on -rcu branch rcu/idle: >> >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git >> >> This problem has been in place since 3.3, so it is hard to argue that >> it is a regression for this merge window. I have therefore queued it >> for 3.7. > > I don't follow that; I would expect any serious bug fix (serious enough > for a stable update) to be acceptable for 3.6 at this point. > > If the regression occurred in 3.3, then the cc lines should be something > like: > > Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 3.3+ > > and not the current: > > Cc: 3.2.x.. <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> The Alpha patches fix an even earlier regression resulting in RCU CPU stalls on an SMP kernel built for generic Alpha (which includes the current Debian 3.2-alpha-smp kernel) and renders the kernel pretty much unuseable. I've only tested the two alpha patches together but maybe just the first patch (1/11 alpha: Fix preemption handling in idle loop) might be needed to fix the problem in 3.2. I'll test and let you know. Cheers Michael. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-alpha" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
