lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Feb]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3.10 00/26] 3.10.31-stable review
On 02/20/2014 06:39 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 12:30 AM, Xishi Qiu wrote:
>> On 2014/2/20 8:29, Shuah Khan wrote:
>>
>>> On 02/18/2014 03:46 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 3.10.31 release.
>>>> There are 26 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
>>>> to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
>>>> let me know.
>>>>
>>>> Responses should be made by Thu Feb 20 22:45:20 UTC 2014.
>>>> Anything received after that time might be too late.
>>>>
>>>> The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
>>>>
>>>> kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.0/stable-review/patch-3.10.31-rc1.gz
>>>> and the diffstat can be found below.
>>>>
>>>> thanks,
>>>>
>>>> greg k-h
>>>>
>>>
>>> Compile and boot tests passed on AMD system. Boot failed on Intel
>>> systems. I think the following changes are the suspect, so far by
>>> process of elimination - these two aren't in 3.12 and 3.13
>>>
>>> # modified: mm/hugetlb.c
>>> # modified: mm/memory-failure.c
>>>
>>> However, my strong suspect is the following:
>>>
>>> Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com>
>>> mm: fix process accidentally killed by mce because of huge page
>>> migration
>>>
>>> I don't see how this could cause problems, none the less, I will test
>>> without these changes and let you know.
>>>
>>>
>>> Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>
>>> mm/memory-failure.c: fix memory leak in successful soft offlining
>>>
>>> I will test without these changes and let you know.
>>>
>>> -- Shuah
>>>
>>
>> Hi Shuah
>>
>> I tested on my system, it boot successfully.
>>
>> hardware: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2420 0 @ 1.90GHz
>> OS: v3.10.30 + the two patches
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Xishi Qiu
>
> Xishi,
>
> I tested without your patch and still see the issue. My wild guess
> wasn't a good one :) I am starting git bisect now.
>
> -- Shuah
>
>

ok I have it isolated to the following patch:

Dirk Brandewie <dirk.j.brandewie@intel.com>
intel_pstate: Take core C0 time into account for core busy calculation

From: Dirk Brandewie <dirk.j.brandewie@intel.com>

commit fcb6a15c2e7e76d493e6f91ea889ab40e1c643a4 upstream.

Take non-idle time into account when calculating core busy time.
This ensures that intel_pstate will notice a decrease in load.

Boots just fine without this change.

-- Shuah

--
Shuah Khan
Senior Linux Kernel Developer - Open Source Group
Samsung Research America(Silicon Valley)
shuah.kh@samsung.com | (970) 672-0658


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-02-20 18:41    [W:0.052 / U:0.624 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site