Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752612AbXA2Vbi (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:31:38 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752611AbXA2Vbh (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:31:37 -0500 Received: from e1.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.141]:48978 "EHLO e1.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752612AbXA2Vbg (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:31:36 -0500 Subject: Re: [patch 00/46] High resolution timer / dynamic tick update From: john stultz To: Andrew Morton Cc: Thomas Gleixner , LKML , Ingo Molnar , Arjan van de Veen , Roman Zippel In-Reply-To: <20070127181759.eb7fe5e8.akpm@osdl.org> References: <20070123211159.178138000@localhost.localdomain> <20070127181759.eb7fe5e8.akpm@osdl.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:31:30 -0800 Message-Id: <1170106290.1296.22.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1472 Lines: 38 On Sat, 2007-01-27 at 18:17 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 22:00:55 -0000 > Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > This is a full replacement queue for the high resolution timer / dynamic > > ticks implemementation in -mm. > > The Vaio broke again. Seems to hang permanently the first time it tries to > sleep. The cursor doesn't flash. Adding "clock=pit" doesn't fix it. I'm > disinclined to bisect it since the patch series fails to compile at > practically all bisections points. > > I'll drop all the patches, which means I drop John's vsyscall patches and > his x86_64 conversion as well. "He's got a bug!" What's his bug got to do with me? "He's got a bug!" I ain't trying to hear that, see? But seriously (the above might be too obscure of a reference :), my x86_64 GTOD patches were against vanilla and were not dependent on the HRT patches. There were a few merge/fixup patches in your tree, but I don't recall many of them being really interleaved w/ the HRT code. I'm I missing or forgetting some bit? Should I just revive the old 2.6.20-rc4-mm1 patches against your current tree and re-submit? Or should the HRT bits get settled first? "ain't no future in fronting" -john - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/