On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 8:24 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Replying here too just in case.
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 02:08:40PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> >> static inline void *idr_find(struct idr *idr, int id)
>>> >> {
>>> >>
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Replying here too just in case.
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 02:08:40PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> >> static inline void *idr_find(struct idr *idr, int id)
>> >> {
>> >> struct idr_layer *hint = rcu_dereference_raw(idr->hint);
>> >>
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 05:14:04PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> I am not screaming or whining... people should reflect a bit on the
> patch workflow process? Also, I am sure a patchwork-service especially
> for -next is helpful.
Ok, now this formulation reads much nicer. So if you really think
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 5:08 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 04:56:27PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> Hmm, I am not very amused to read all this, really.
>>
>> If such fixes are around why aren't they applied quickly?
>
> Sedat, you need to relax a little. You're testing a
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 04:56:27PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> Hmm, I am not very amused to read all this, really.
>
> If such fixes are around why aren't they applied quickly?
Sedat, you need to relax a little. You're testing a linux next tree
right during the merge window where patches are
Replying here too just in case.
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 02:08:40PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >> static inline void *idr_find(struct idr *idr, int id)
> >> {
> >> struct idr_layer *hint = rcu_dereference_raw(idr->hint);
> >> 86d7: 48 8b 05 00 00 00 00mov0x0(%rip),%rax
Hi Sedat,
> I have reported this issue several times (first for next-20130223) to
> LKML and Linux-Next MLs but got no answer.
> I am unsure which is the root cause for all this trouble.
>
> Can someone have a look at this, please?
>
> [0.065787] smpboot: CPU0: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2467M
Hi Sedat,
I have reported this issue several times (first for next-20130223) to
LKML and Linux-Next MLs but got no answer.
I am unsure which is the root cause for all this trouble.
Can someone have a look at this, please?
[0.065787] smpboot: CPU0: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2467M CPU @
Replying here too just in case.
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 02:08:40PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
static inline void *idr_find(struct idr *idr, int id)
{
struct idr_layer *hint = rcu_dereference_raw(idr-hint);
86d7: 48 8b 05 00 00 00 00mov0x0(%rip),%rax#
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 04:56:27PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
Hmm, I am not very amused to read all this, really.
If such fixes are around why aren't they applied quickly?
Sedat, you need to relax a little. You're testing a linux next tree
right during the merge window where patches are flying
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 5:08 PM, Borislav Petkov b...@alien8.de wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 04:56:27PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
Hmm, I am not very amused to read all this, really.
If such fixes are around why aren't they applied quickly?
Sedat, you need to relax a little. You're testing
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 05:14:04PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
I am not screaming or whining... people should reflect a bit on the
patch workflow process? Also, I am sure a patchwork-service especially
for -next is helpful.
Ok, now this formulation reads much nicer. So if you really think this
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tejun Heo t...@kernel.org wrote:
Replying here too just in case.
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 02:08:40PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
static inline void *idr_find(struct idr *idr, int id)
{
struct idr_layer *hint = rcu_dereference_raw(idr-hint);
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 8:24 AM, Sedat Dilek sedat.di...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tejun Heo t...@kernel.org wrote:
Replying here too just in case.
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 02:08:40PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
static inline void *idr_find(struct idr *idr, int id)
{
14 matches
Mail list logo
