On 09/24/2012 03:42 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 15:27 +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: >> On 09/24/2012 03:08 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>>> + hotcpu_notifier(sched_domains_numa_masks_update, CPU_PRI_SCHED_ACTIVE); >>>> hotcpu_notifier(cpuset_cpu_active, CPU_PRI_CPUSET_ACTIVE); >>>> hotcpu_notifier(cpuset_cpu_inactive, CPU_PRI_CPUSET_INACTIVE); >>> >>> OK, so you really want your notifier to run before cpuset_cpu_active >>> because otherwise you get that crash, yet you fail with the whole order >>> thing.. You should not _ever_ rely on registration order. >>> >> >> IMHO he isn't relying on registration order.. He uses the CPU_PRI_SCHED_ACTIVE >> priority to ensure that the ordering of callbacks is right, isn't it? > > Oh argh indeed. I can't read :/ > ;-) Regards, Srivatsa S. Bhat -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-numa" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
