On Fri 15-02-13 11:53:37, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-02-15 at 17:50 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Thu 14-02-13 13:48:11, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2013-02-12 at 13:22 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Anyway, what do you guys think about this version?
> > > > Steven,
Here comes addition to Steven's patch from this thread...
>From bda93cfa4133c41e8f10dcd371d1f025d94b85dc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jan Kara
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 19:15:30 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] printk: Remove per-cpu printk flags
There's no need to have printk flags percpu. Just make a
On Fri, 2013-02-15 at 17:50 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 14-02-13 13:48:11, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-02-12 at 13:22 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> >
> > > > Anyway, what do you guys think about this version?
> > > Steven, Andrew, did you have a chance to look at my patches?
> >
> >
On Thu 14-02-13 13:48:11, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-02-12 at 13:22 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
>
> > > Anyway, what do you guys think about this version?
> > Steven, Andrew, did you have a chance to look at my patches?
>
> Can you resend without being attachments. Patches sent as
On Thu 14-02-13 13:48:11, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Tue, 2013-02-12 at 13:22 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
Anyway, what do you guys think about this version?
Steven, Andrew, did you have a chance to look at my patches?
Can you resend without being attachments. Patches sent as attachments
On Fri, 2013-02-15 at 17:50 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
On Thu 14-02-13 13:48:11, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Tue, 2013-02-12 at 13:22 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
Anyway, what do you guys think about this version?
Steven, Andrew, did you have a chance to look at my patches?
Can you resend
Here comes addition to Steven's patch from this thread...
From bda93cfa4133c41e8f10dcd371d1f025d94b85dc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jan Kara j...@suse.cz
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 19:15:30 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] printk: Remove per-cpu printk flags
There's no need to have printk flags percpu.
On Fri 15-02-13 11:53:37, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Fri, 2013-02-15 at 17:50 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
On Thu 14-02-13 13:48:11, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Tue, 2013-02-12 at 13:22 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
Anyway, what do you guys think about this version?
Steven, Andrew, did you have
On Tue, 2013-02-12 at 13:22 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Anyway, what do you guys think about this version?
> Steven, Andrew, did you have a chance to look at my patches?
Can you resend without being attachments. Patches sent as attachments
seldom get reviewed.
-- Steve
--
To unsubscribe from
On Tue, 2013-02-12 at 13:22 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
Anyway, what do you guys think about this version?
Steven, Andrew, did you have a chance to look at my patches?
Can you resend without being attachments. Patches sent as attachments
seldom get reviewed.
-- Steve
--
To unsubscribe from
On Thu 07-02-13 00:02:20, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 05-02-13 20:05:48, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > [ I sent this in a reply to another thread, but wanted a bit more attention
> > to it ]
> >
> > To prevent deadlocks with doing a printk inside the scheduler,
> > printk_sched() was created. The issue
On Thu 07-02-13 00:02:20, Jan Kara wrote:
On Tue 05-02-13 20:05:48, Steven Rostedt wrote:
[ I sent this in a reply to another thread, but wanted a bit more attention
to it ]
To prevent deadlocks with doing a printk inside the scheduler,
printk_sched() was created. The issue is that
On Tue 05-02-13 20:05:48, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> [ I sent this in a reply to another thread, but wanted a bit more attention
> to it ]
>
> To prevent deadlocks with doing a printk inside the scheduler,
> printk_sched() was created. The issue is that printk has a console_sem
> that it can grab
On Tue 05-02-13 20:05:48, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> [ I sent this in a reply to another thread, but wanted a bit more attention
> to it ]
>
> To prevent deadlocks with doing a printk inside the scheduler,
> printk_sched() was created. The issue is that printk has a console_sem
> that it can grab
On Tue 05-02-13 20:05:48, Steven Rostedt wrote:
[ I sent this in a reply to another thread, but wanted a bit more attention
to it ]
To prevent deadlocks with doing a printk inside the scheduler,
printk_sched() was created. The issue is that printk has a console_sem
that it can grab and
On Tue 05-02-13 20:05:48, Steven Rostedt wrote:
[ I sent this in a reply to another thread, but wanted a bit more attention
to it ]
To prevent deadlocks with doing a printk inside the scheduler,
printk_sched() was created. The issue is that printk has a console_sem
that it can grab and
[ I sent this in a reply to another thread, but wanted a bit more attention to
it ]
To prevent deadlocks with doing a printk inside the scheduler,
printk_sched() was created. The issue is that printk has a console_sem
that it can grab and release. The release does a wake up if there's a
task
[ I sent this in a reply to another thread, but wanted a bit more attention to
it ]
To prevent deadlocks with doing a printk inside the scheduler,
printk_sched() was created. The issue is that printk has a console_sem
that it can grab and release. The release does a wake up if there's a
task
18 matches
Mail list logo
