On 02/19/2013 11:40 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 01:10:51PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: >> Once stop_machine() is gone from the CPU offline path, we won't be able to >> depend on preempt_disable() or local_irq_disable() to prevent CPUs from >> going offline from under us. >> >> Use the get/put_online_cpus_atomic() APIs to prevent CPUs from going offline, >> while invoking from atomic context. >> >> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.w...@oracle.com> > > Weird. I see this in the patch but I don't see it in the header?
Meaning, you didn't get this email at all? > Did you > explicitly suppress the CC part? > No.. I sent the entire patchset to a set of email ids and in addition to that I CC'ed individual patches to the respective maintainers/lists (the CC: list in the changelog). I used the --auto knob from stgit to do that. > > Anyhow, the patch looks sane enough, thought I need to to run it through > a test framework just to be on a sure side. > Sure, thank you. But you might want to test the v6 that I sent out yesterday instead of v5. Oh, wait a min, you didn't get the v6 mail also? Here it is, for your reference: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=136119260122255&w=2 Regards, Srivatsa S. Bhat >> Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jer...@goop.org> >> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <h...@zytor.com> >> Cc: x...@kernel.org >> Cc: xen-de...@lists.xensource.com >> Cc: virtualizat...@lists.linux-foundation.org >> Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.b...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >> --- _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
