On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 02:13:33PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > I can indeed confirm it's running old code; cpuhp_state is no more. > > Does this mean the below chain is no longer possible with the current > linux-next (tip)? I see I failed to answer this; no it will happen but now reads like: s/cpuhp_state/&_up/ Where we used to have a single lock protecting the hotplug stuff, we now have 2, one for bringing stuff up and one for tearing it down. This got rid of lock cycles that included cpu-up and cpu-down parts; those are false positives because we cannot do cpu-up and cpu-down concurrently. But this report only includes a single (cpu-up) part and therefore is not affected by that change other than a lock name changing. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
