>>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at  2:52 PM, in message <487F9509.9050802@qualcomm.com>,
Max Krasnyansky <maxk@qualcomm.com> wrote: 
quoted text
> Gregory Haskins wrote:
>>
>> Hi Max,
>>   Thanks for the pointers.  I see that I did indeed misunderstand the intent 
>> of the patch.  It seems you already solved the rebuild problem, and were
>> just trying to solve the "migrate to a dead cpu" problem that Linus mentions
>> as a solution with cpu_active_map.
>
> Yes. btw they are definitely related, because the reason we were blowing 
> away the domains is to avoid "migration to a dead cpu". ie We were relying
> on the fact that domain masks never contain cpus that are either dying or
> already dead.

Agreed.

quoted text
>> 
>> Thoughts?
>
> None at this point :). I need to run right now and will try to look at this
> later today. My knowledge of the internal sched structs is definitely 
> lacking so I need to look at the rq->rd thing to have and opinion.

Sounds good, Max.  Thanks!

-Greg


--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/