On Wed, 9 Oct 2013 16:20:12 -0400
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 08:43:56AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > On 08/29/2013 04:51 PM, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
> > >
> > > This is not a regression just as Eric explains.
> > >
> > > There is also my explanation in the description of
On Wed, 9 Oct 2013 16:20:12 -0400
Vivek Goyal vgo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 08:43:56AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 08/29/2013 04:51 PM, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
This is not a regression just as Eric explains.
There is also my explanation in the description
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 08:43:56AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 08/29/2013 04:51 PM, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
> >
> > This is not a regression just as Eric explains.
> >
> > There is also my explanation in the description of the 2nd patch. I
> > should have described so here explicitly.
> >
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 08:43:56AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 08/29/2013 04:51 PM, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
This is not a regression just as Eric explains.
There is also my explanation in the description of the 2nd patch. I
should have described so here explicitly.
OK.
On 08/29/2013 04:51 PM, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
>
> This is not a regression just as Eric explains.
>
> There is also my explanation in the description of the 2nd patch. I
> should have described so here explicitly.
>
OK. We're probably days away from a merge window, so I would like to
put
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 04:37:44PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
[..]
> This situation is people who run machines of unreasonable size really
> would like to use multiple cpus when generating crash dumps.
Yes. Now kdump is in a phase where people are doing scalability work. And
one of the
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 04:37:44PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
[..]
This situation is people who run machines of unreasonable size really
would like to use multiple cpus when generating crash dumps.
Yes. Now kdump is in a phase where people are doing scalability work. And
one of the
On 08/29/2013 04:51 PM, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
This is not a regression just as Eric explains.
There is also my explanation in the description of the 2nd patch. I
should have described so here explicitly.
OK. We're probably days away from a merge window, so I would like to
put this in
(2013/08/29 22:54), H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 08/29/2013 02:27 AM, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
This is the patch series to address the issue that kdump 2nd kernel
now fails to wake up multiple CPUs.
Please explain the "now" in the above sentence. Is this a regression?
If so, what is its impact?
"H. Peter Anvin" writes:
> On 08/29/2013 02:27 AM, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
>> This is the patch series to address the issue that kdump 2nd kernel
>> now fails to wake up multiple CPUs.
>
> Please explain the "now" in the above sentence. Is this a regression?
> If so, what is its fimpact?
This
On 08/29/2013 02:27 AM, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
> This is the patch series to address the issue that kdump 2nd kernel
> now fails to wake up multiple CPUs.
Please explain the "now" in the above sentence. Is this a regression?
If so, what is its impact? Is this something that needs to go into
This is the patch series to address the issue that kdump 2nd kernel
now fails to wake up multiple CPUs.
This is based on 3.11-rc7.
I tested this patch series on x86. I used 2 cpus by specifying
nr_cpus=2 for the 2nd kernel. I checked both ACPI MADT and MP table
case; the former is default on my
This is the patch series to address the issue that kdump 2nd kernel
now fails to wake up multiple CPUs.
This is based on 3.11-rc7.
I tested this patch series on x86. I used 2 cpus by specifying
nr_cpus=2 for the 2nd kernel. I checked both ACPI MADT and MP table
case; the former is default on my
On 08/29/2013 02:27 AM, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
This is the patch series to address the issue that kdump 2nd kernel
now fails to wake up multiple CPUs.
Please explain the now in the above sentence. Is this a regression?
If so, what is its impact? Is this something that needs to go into 3.11
H. Peter Anvin h...@linux.intel.com writes:
On 08/29/2013 02:27 AM, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
This is the patch series to address the issue that kdump 2nd kernel
now fails to wake up multiple CPUs.
Please explain the now in the above sentence. Is this a regression?
If so, what is its
(2013/08/29 22:54), H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 08/29/2013 02:27 AM, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
This is the patch series to address the issue that kdump 2nd kernel
now fails to wake up multiple CPUs.
Please explain the now in the above sentence. Is this a regression?
If so, what is its impact? Is
16 matches
Mail list logo
