On Wed, 11 Jul 2018, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 11/07/2018 15:42, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > Hi Daniel,
> >
> > On 11/07/18 12:36, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> >> On 11/07/2018 13:24, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> >>> Currently, quite a few clockevent devices have cpumask set to
> >>> cpu_all_mask which should b
On 11/07/2018 15:42, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On 11/07/18 12:36, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 11/07/2018 13:24, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>> Currently, quite a few clockevent devices have cpumask set to
>>> cpu_all_mask which should be fine. However, cpu_possible_mask is more
>>> accurate an
Hi Daniel,
On 11/07/18 12:36, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 11/07/2018 13:24, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>> Currently, quite a few clockevent devices have cpumask set to
>> cpu_all_mask which should be fine. However, cpu_possible_mask is more
>> accurate and if there are any other clockevent devices in the
On 11/07/2018 13:24, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Currently, quite a few clockevent devices have cpumask set to
> cpu_all_mask which should be fine. However, cpu_possible_mask is more
> accurate and if there are any other clockevent devices in the system
> which have cpumask set to cpu_possible_mask, then
Currently, quite a few clockevent devices have cpumask set to
cpu_all_mask which should be fine. However, cpu_possible_mask is more
accurate and if there are any other clockevent devices in the system
which have cpumask set to cpu_possible_mask, then having cpu_all_mask
may result in issues (mostly
5 matches
Mail list logo
