Re: sched: CPU #1's llc-sibling CPU #0 is not on the same node!

[Linus Torvalds]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Andrew Morton
<akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> So I'm thinking that the best approach here is to revert everything and
> then try again for 3.10-rc1.  This gives people time to test the code
> while it's only in linux-next.  (Hint!)

I'd prefer to revert too by now - the bug seems to be known, and
apparently it's not a trivial fix. We're getting close to the end of
the merge window, and it's still being discussed, it clearly wasn't
really fully cooked.

Can we agree on some minimal set of reverts? Can somebody send me a
patch with the revert and the commit explanation for the revert?
Yinghai? Or I can do the reverts too if just the exact set of commits
is clear, but I'd rather get it from somebody who sees and understand
the problem, and can test the state afterwards..

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