On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 05:14:00PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 04/06/2016 09:51 PM, Heiko Carstens wrote: > > This fixes the issue that a second cpu_down() will take forever, if > > __cpu_disable() fails. > > Yes. But even without the second take down your CPU isn't complete up. > > > However it does not fix the issue that CPU_DOWN_FAILED will be seen on a > > different cpu than the cpu that was supposed to be taken offline. > > This is correct. It fixes only the regression you reported. > The CPU_DOWN_FAILED patches are on hold for now. Ok, I was bit confused here. So you may add Tested-by: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx> if you want to :) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-s390" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
