On 01.12.2012 20:13, Tejun Heo wrote:
Hello,
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 06:11:10PM +0100, Zlatko Calusic wrote:
Sure. Please clarify, should I apply it on top of the previous one
or standalone?
It's a replacement, so by itself.
Thanks!
I have good news, again. The kernel with the patch
Hello,
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 06:11:10PM +0100, Zlatko Calusic wrote:
> Sure. Please clarify, should I apply it on top of the previous one
> or standalone?
It's a replacement, so by itself.
Thanks!
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the
On 01.12.2012 15:38, Tejun Heo wrote:
Hello,
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 12:06:41PM +0100, Zlatko Calusic wrote:
I have good news. The patch fixes the regression!
To doublecheck and provide you additional data, I updated to the latest Linus
kernel (commit 7c17e48), recompiled (WITHOUT the patch),
Hello,
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 12:06:41PM +0100, Zlatko Calusic wrote:
> I have good news. The patch fixes the regression!
>
> To doublecheck and provide you additional data, I updated to the latest Linus
> kernel (commit 7c17e48), recompiled (WITHOUT the patch), rebooted and this is
> what
On 30.11.2012 23:55, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, again.
>
> Can you please try this patch? Thanks!
>
> diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
> index 042d221..26368ef 100644
> --- a/kernel/workqueue.c
> +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
> @@ -1477,7 +1477,10 @@ bool mod_delayed_work_on(int
On 30.11.2012 23:55, Tejun Heo wrote:
Hello, again.
Can you please try this patch? Thanks!
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 042d221..26368ef 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -1477,7 +1477,10 @@ bool mod_delayed_work_on(int cpu,
Hello,
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 12:06:41PM +0100, Zlatko Calusic wrote:
I have good news. The patch fixes the regression!
To doublecheck and provide you additional data, I updated to the latest Linus
kernel (commit 7c17e48), recompiled (WITHOUT the patch), rebooted and this is
what vmstat 1
On 01.12.2012 15:38, Tejun Heo wrote:
Hello,
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 12:06:41PM +0100, Zlatko Calusic wrote:
I have good news. The patch fixes the regression!
To doublecheck and provide you additional data, I updated to the latest Linus
kernel (commit 7c17e48), recompiled (WITHOUT the patch),
Hello,
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 06:11:10PM +0100, Zlatko Calusic wrote:
Sure. Please clarify, should I apply it on top of the previous one
or standalone?
It's a replacement, so by itself.
Thanks!
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of
On 01.12.2012 20:13, Tejun Heo wrote:
Hello,
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 06:11:10PM +0100, Zlatko Calusic wrote:
Sure. Please clarify, should I apply it on top of the previous one
or standalone?
It's a replacement, so by itself.
Thanks!
I have good news, again. The kernel with the patch
On 30.11.2012 23:52, Tejun Heo wrote:
Hello, Zlatko.
Sorry about the delay. Your message was in my spam folder. The
attachment seems to have confused the filter.
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 02:01:29PM +0100, Zlatko Calusic wrote:
This week I spent some hours tracking a regression in 3.7 kernel
Hello, again.
Can you please try this patch? Thanks!
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 042d221..26368ef 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -1477,7 +1477,10 @@ bool mod_delayed_work_on(int cpu, struct
workqueue_struct *wq,
} while
Hello, Zlatko.
Sorry about the delay. Your message was in my spam folder. The
attachment seems to have confused the filter.
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 02:01:29PM +0100, Zlatko Calusic wrote:
> This week I spent some hours tracking a regression in 3.7 kernel
> that was producing high context
Hello, Zlatko.
Sorry about the delay. Your message was in my spam folder. The
attachment seems to have confused the filter.
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 02:01:29PM +0100, Zlatko Calusic wrote:
This week I spent some hours tracking a regression in 3.7 kernel
that was producing high context switch
Hello, again.
Can you please try this patch? Thanks!
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 042d221..26368ef 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -1477,7 +1477,10 @@ bool mod_delayed_work_on(int cpu, struct
workqueue_struct *wq,
} while
On 30.11.2012 23:52, Tejun Heo wrote:
Hello, Zlatko.
Sorry about the delay. Your message was in my spam folder. The
attachment seems to have confused the filter.
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 02:01:29PM +0100, Zlatko Calusic wrote:
This week I spent some hours tracking a regression in 3.7 kernel
Hello Tejun et al.
This week I spent some hours tracking a regression in 3.7 kernel that
was producing high context switch rate on one of my machines. I
carefully bisected between 3.6 and 3.7-rc1 and eventually found this
commit a culprit:
commit e7c2f967445dd2041f0f8e3179cca22bb8bb7f79
Hello Tejun et al.
This week I spent some hours tracking a regression in 3.7 kernel that
was producing high context switch rate on one of my machines. I
carefully bisected between 3.6 and 3.7-rc1 and eventually found this
commit a culprit:
commit e7c2f967445dd2041f0f8e3179cca22bb8bb7f79
18 matches
Mail list logo
