Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S968165Ab0B0KMp (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Feb 2010 05:12:45 -0500 Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:53245 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S968123Ab0B0KMn (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Feb 2010 05:12:43 -0500 To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Yinghai Lu , mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org References: <20100207210250.GB8256@jenkins.home.ifup.org> <4B881097.1050505@kernel.org> <20100227091043.GA31794@elte.hu> <20100227095313.GG31794@elte.hu> From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 02:12:34 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20100227095313.GG31794@elte.hu> (Ingo Molnar's message of "Sat\, 27 Feb 2010 10\:53\:13 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-XM-SPF: eid=;;;mid=;;;hst=in01.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=76.21.114.89;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 76.21.114.89 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa02 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;Ingo Molnar X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Report: * -1.8 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 1.5 TR_Symld_Words too many words that have symbols inside * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG * -3.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa02 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.0 T_TooManySym_04 7+ unique symbols in subject * 0.0 T_TooManySym_01 4+ unique symbols in subject * 0.0 T_TooManySym_03 6+ unique symbols in subject * 0.0 XM_SPF_Neutral SPF-Neutral * 0.0 T_TooManySym_02 5+ unique symbols in subject * 0.4 UNTRUSTED_Relay Comes from a non-trusted relay Subject: Re: [tip:x86/irq] x86: apic: Fix mismerge, add arch_probe_nr_irqs() again X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 25 Oct 2007 00:26:12 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 979 Lines: 26 Ingo Molnar writes: >> Ingo do you have any idea what NR_IRQS or nr_irqs were/are on >> that failing machine? > > Sorry, not - and the merge window doesnt leave much time to revisit the > problem right now. > > But the failures were very real and 100% caused by this: they resulted in > non-existent /dev/sda* nodes and resulting fsck failure by rc. I have looked it over a second time and I have convinced myself that arch_probe_nr_irqs will in the worst case reduce nr_irqs, and never increase it beyond NR_IRQS. So this revert (keeping arch_probe_nr_irqs) is safe. It makes little sense that a larger nr_irqs would be a problem, but clearly there are assumptions somewhere that we still need to remove. Eric -- 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/