On 28.12.2011, at 06:01, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-12-25 at 11:48 +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 24.12.2011, at 07:53, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 17:54 +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
Hi guys,
While trying to test my latest patc
On Sun, 2011-12-25 at 11:48 +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
> On 24.12.2011, at 07:53, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 17:54 +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >> Hi guys,
> >>
> >> While trying to test my latest patch queue for ppc kvm, I realized
> >> that even though the dev
On 24.12.2011, at 07:53, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 17:54 +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> While trying to test my latest patch queue for ppc kvm, I realized
>> that even though the device trees got updated, the p1020 box still is
>> unstable. The trace b
On Fri, 2011-12-23 at 17:54 +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> While trying to test my latest patch queue for ppc kvm, I realized
> that even though the device trees got updated, the p1020 box still is
> unstable. The trace below is the one I've seen the most. It only
> occurs during netw
Hi guys,
While trying to test my latest patch queue for ppc kvm, I realized that even
though the device trees got updated, the p1020 box still is unstable. The trace
below is the one I've seen the most. It only occurs during network I/O which
happens a lot on that box, since I'm running it usin