From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933902AbbENV2F (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 May 2015 17:28:05 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:53460 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933339AbbENV2A (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 May 2015 17:28:00 -0400 Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 23:27:53 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Gu Zheng , "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86, espfix: use spin_lock rather than mutex Message-ID: <20150514212753.GE29125@pd.tnic> References: <1431603465-12610-1-git-send-email-guz.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> <20150514122621.GB29235@pd.tnic> <20150514182954.GB23479@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150514182954.GB23479@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Remove stable@ from CC. On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 08:29:55PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > We could allocate them on the boot CPU side and hand them over to the > secondary CPU. Yeah, something along those lines. I mean, they're allocated and in-use during the complete system lifetime, we might just as well allocate them all in one go. Btw, what's our allocator that early, memblock? Still, what I find strange is why are we seeing this only now? Is it because it had to be a big box (cpu >= 128) or something else changed...? Hohumm. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply. --