On 6 December 2012 15:36, Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 6 December 2012 19:36, Amit Kucheria <amit.kuche...@linaro.org> wrote: >> Even if that is the case, I'm afraid I don't quite like the way this was >> done. IMHO, you shouldn't just revert bits of another author's patches that >> you don't agree with. >> >> If there are issues regarding the the patches from Vincent, I'd do the >> following things in order of priority: >> 1. Prove to him that the race exists, preferably with a reproducible test >> case >> 2. Give him a chance to convince you otherwise >> 3. Share test results that show bad things happen as a result of some code >> 4. Ask _him_ to separate out that bit from the original patch so you can >> only pick the bits you like >> >> I haven't seen this happen. All I've seen is one side claim it can happen >> and the other claim that it can't. *shrug* >> >> Viresh, as an experienced maintainer, I hope you see the value of this >> approach rather than just pull in the tree. >> >> I realise we're all under pressure here. So let's take a deep breath, step >> back and do it the right way. > > First of all i must admit, i haven't followed the discussion closely, as this > part of kernel is still rocket science for me :) > > Secondly, what you said is correct Amit. But, i must say there has been a > long time since the last time release happened and all this must have > been sorted out in that time both from Linaro and ARM side. And i didn't > saw any effort on that. Only when i came back to sort out issues in my > tree, this issue is still highlighted. > > Now, getting so close to release and making a big change, that will eventually > affect the core part we are working on is not a great idea.
IMHO, we should keep sched-pack-small-tasks-v1-fixed instead of sched-pack-small-tasks-v1-arm - packing small task is disable with sched-pack-small-tasks-v1-arm. - sched: secure access to other CPU statistics ensure value coherency. This patch solves perhaps not all use cases and I have to study this point but it solves most of racing accesses for sure.We will just enlarge the breach by removing it > > But we still have some time for a meaningful discussion to happen and > one party to agree. Both can't be correct. I need to send the pull request > by Monday and so whatever is required to be done, must be done by tomorrow > evening. > > -- > viresh _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
