Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: Reduce verbosity on SMP CPU stop

2016-04-18 Thread Jan Glauber
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 01:19:31PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 09:43:33AM +0200, Jan Glauber wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:37:06PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > > > You can remove stop_lock altogether now, right? I also wonder whether > > > it would be worth printing o

Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: Reduce verbosity on SMP CPU stop

2016-04-18 Thread Will Deacon
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 09:43:33AM +0200, Jan Glauber wrote: > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:37:06PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > > You can remove stop_lock altogether now, right? I also wonder whether > > it would be worth printing out which CPUs are still online in the case where > > we fail to stop

[PATCH v2] arm64: Reduce verbosity on SMP CPU stop

2016-04-18 Thread Jan Glauber
On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:37:06PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > You can remove stop_lock altogether now, right? I also wonder whether > it would be worth printing out which CPUs are still online in the case where > we fail to stop all the secondaries? Sorry, I've been a bit offline. Yes, the stop_l