* Chris Metcalf <cmetc...@ezchip.com> wrote:
> On 4/4/2015 10:10 AM, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >>Rik, what's the change you're proposing that's similar to this one? Thanks!
> >I don't have this particular one, and I like it.
> >
> >I know there are use cases where isolcpus= without
> >nohz_full= makes sense, but I cannot think of the
> >reverse.
> >
> >Acked-by: Rik van Riel<r...@redhat.com>
>
> Thanks, I'll push it via the tile tree unless someone would prefer otherwise.
Yes, I'd prefer otherwise: please send the final, agreed upon patch to
the timer tree.
> (The tick_nohz_full_set_cpus() and tick_nohz_full_clear_cpus()
> routines are in earlier tile tree commits, the latter supporting a
> change to the tile network driver.)
This is absolutely not OK, please push this through the timer tree. We
don't do generic timer changes through architecture trees.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
