Re: [pchecks v2 2/2] percpu: Add preemption checks to __this_cpu ops

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



* Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > > That is exactly what this patch does. There will only be warning if 
> > > the user enabled them.
> >
> > You didn't understand me apparently: all warnings that trigger with 
> > the debug CONFIG option enabled must be fixed before this can be sent 
> > upstream.
> 
> This patchset is required to determine the warnings that will be 
> triggered and to get the work to address these issues done. The feedback 
> so far indicates that there may be lots of discussions regarding the 
> warnings that have been discovered so far. Its not realistic to do this 
> in one go.

Please submit them once you had the time to ensure that they are ready and 
produce no warnings on your system(s) with debugging enabled.

To help out I can stage them for you in a branch within the scheduler tree 
if you think there are spurious warnings - as long as you fix and address 
any bug reports and review feedback received in a timely fashion. I'll 
send it upstream once the debug code has settled down and doesn't produce 
false warnings.

Also, just to make it clear, as I mentioned it in my previous mail: until 
the debug code becomes upstream worthy and converge, consider all your 
__this_cpu patches NAK-ed by me.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Newbies]     [x86 Platform Driver]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux