On Thu, 29 Jun 2023, Hugh Dickins wrote:
>
> I've grown to dislike the (ab)use of pt_frag_refcount even more, to the
> extent that I've not even tried to verify it; but I think I do get the
> point now, that we need further info than just PPHHAA to know whether
> the page is on the list or not. B
On 7/1/23 09:08, Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Jul 1, 2023 at 7:40 AM Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 05:06:18PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
The HAVE_ prefix means that the code could be enabled. Add another
variable for HAVE_HARDLOCKUP_DETECTOR_ARCH without this prefix.
It wil
On 7/1/23 09:08, Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Jul 1, 2023 at 7:40 AM Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 05:06:18PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
The HAVE_ prefix means that the code could be enabled. Add another
variable for HAVE_HARDLOCKUP_DETECTOR_ARCH without this prefix.
It wil
Hi,
On Sat, Jul 1, 2023 at 7:40 AM Guenter Roeck wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 05:06:18PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > The HAVE_ prefix means that the code could be enabled. Add another
> > variable for HAVE_HARDLOCKUP_DETECTOR_ARCH without this prefix.
> > It will be set when it should be
On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 05:06:18PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> The HAVE_ prefix means that the code could be enabled. Add another
> variable for HAVE_HARDLOCKUP_DETECTOR_ARCH without this prefix.
> It will be set when it should be built. It will make it compatible
> with the other hardlockup detect
