Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755868AbYHKW40 (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:56:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751680AbYHKW4S (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:56:18 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:53466 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751430AbYHKW4S (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:56:18 -0400 Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:55:57 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Max Krasnyansky Cc: Linus Torvalds , Dmitry Adamushko , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "Langsdorf, Mark" , lkml , Gautham R Shenoy , Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: Regression in 2.6.27-rc1 for set_cpus_allowed_ptr Message-ID: <20080811225557.GA2068@elte.hu> References: <6453C3CB8E2B3646B0D020C112613273C5AC5A@sausexmb4.amd.com> <200808082303.41068.rjw@sisk.pl> <20080811123020.GB10082@elte.hu> <48A0B9AC.6020901@qualcomm.com> <20080811224636.GA25577@elte.hu> <48A0C213.4090305@qualcomm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <48A0C213.4090305@qualcomm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1848 Lines: 45 * Max Krasnyansky wrote: > > > Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Max Krasnyansky wrote: > > > >>> And I was hoping to do -rc3 today. Can I please have pull-requests for the > >>> appropriate urgent scheduler/x86 fixes? Or should I just take these as > >>> patches? > >> It'd be nice if -rc3 included my cpuset patch so that we could put circular > >> locking issues in the cpu hotplug path to the rest. > >> Ingo, I'm talking about this: > >> [PATCH] cpuset: Rework sched domains and CPU hotplug handling (take 4) > > > > the latest (-v4) version of the patch was submitted just half an hour > > ago and it's rather large/complex, with a few unrelated changes > > (whitespace, etc.) mixed in as well. I'd like to wait for Paul's final > > ack for -v4 (he has already agreed with the approach in general), and > > wanted to have it tested myself as well, at least minimally. > > Fair enough. > > btw Whitespace and other cosmetic changes were requested by reviewers. yeah - it just makes it a tiny bit harder decision whether to queue up a patch in the urgent path. It's better to keep cleanups separate - that way any typos and unintended bugs in cleanups are more obvious as well. (because later on a person debugging a breakage does not have to wonder about whether a change's side-effects were intended or not.) But your patch certainly looks OK standalone as well, just IMO not as a very-last-minute patch. (No strong feelings though, your patch should not break anything in the normal !CPUSETS or the CPUSETS+no-cpuset-used usecases.) Ingo -- 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/