2013/5/20 Srivatsa S. Bhat :
> On 05/17/2013 02:14 PM, Li Zhong wrote:
>> In tick_nohz_cpu_down_callback() if the cpu is the one handling
>> timekeeping , it seems that we should return something that could stop
>> notify CPU_DOWN_PREPARE, and then start notify CPU_DOWN_FAILED on the
>> already cal
On 05/17/2013 02:14 PM, Li Zhong wrote:
> In tick_nohz_cpu_down_callback() if the cpu is the one handling
> timekeeping , it seems that we should return something that could stop
> notify CPU_DOWN_PREPARE, and then start notify CPU_DOWN_FAILED on the
> already called notifier call backs.
>
> -EINV
In tick_nohz_cpu_down_callback() if the cpu is the one handling
timekeeping , it seems that we should return something that could stop
notify CPU_DOWN_PREPARE, and then start notify CPU_DOWN_FAILED on the
already called notifier call backs.
-EINVAL will be converted to 0 by notifier_to_errno(), th
3 matches
Mail list logo