Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/mce: Fix CMCI preemption bugs
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/mce: Fix CMCI preemption bugs
- From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 15:15:25 +0200
- Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>, Owen Kibel <qmewlo@xxxxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "hpa@xxxxxxxxx" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, "linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "atodorov@xxxxxxxxxx" <atodorov@xxxxxxxxxx>, "tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-tip-commits@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-tip-commits@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <20140425084723.GA7455@gchen.bj.intel.com>
- User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
* Chen, Gong <gong.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 10:07:16AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Okay, so AFAICS the fix in x86/urgent isn't wrong functionally, it's
> > just that the changelog incorrectly claims the raw-spinlock use is a
> > bug causing a problem here.
> >
> > Still that raw spinlock is bogus and might be hiding other problems,
> > so we can keep the x86/urgent change (ea431643d6c3) as-is and I'll get
> > it to Linus later today ...
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ingo
> Hi, Ingo
>
> We ever had a patch(59d958d2c7) to make spinlock -> raw_spinlock.
> Would you please explain it a little more why you revert it?
It was years ago and I forgot about that. Should be redone I guess.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Stable Commits]
[Linux Stable Kernel]
[Linux Kernel]
[Linux USB Devel]
[Linux Video &Media]
[Linux Audio Users]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]