Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190925200220.157670-1-dianders@chromium.org>
 <20190925125811.v3.3.Id33c06cbd1516b49820faccd80da01c7c4bf15c7@changeid>
 <20191007135459.lj3qc2tqzcv3xcia@holly.lan> <CAD=FV=Vqj9JqGCQX_Foij8EkFtSy8r2wB3uoXNae6PECwNV+CQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191010150735.dhrj3pbjgmjrdpwr@holly.lan> <CAD=FV=VuOVpvEB60-prMxuPyjcrJ-9O2hyaLKf86c-r9BVocdg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD=FV=VuOVpvEB60-prMxuPyjcrJ-9O2hyaLKf86c-r9BVocdg@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Date:   Sat, 9 Nov 2019 11:20:42 -0800
Message-ID: <CAD=FV=UQeHp9=HGWUHHHpYTt0w+AfTMhTrVAjLeiEReszJLJfQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] kdb: Fix "btc <cpu>" crash if the CPU didn't round up
To:     Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>,
        kgdb-bugreport@lists.sourceforge.net,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 9:38 AM Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 8:07 AM Daniel Thompson
> <daniel.thompson@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > Reading through other control flows of the various backtrace commands,
> > > it looks like it is intentional to leave the current task changed when
> > > you explicitly do an action on that task (or a CPU).
> > >
> > > Actually, though, it wasn't clear to me that it ever made sense for
> > > any of these commands to implicitly leave the current task changed.
> > > If you agree, I can send a follow-up patch to change this behavior.
> >
> > Personally I don't like implicit changes of state but I might need a bit
> > more thinking to agree (or disagree ;-) ).
>
> I can post up a followup after this series lands and change it.  I
> have a feeling nobody is relying on the old behavior and thus nobody
> will notice but it would be nice to get this cleaner.

Sorry it took so long, but follow-up series can be found at:

https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191109191644.191766-1-dianders@chromium.org

-Doug