From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752690AbbHZSVO (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Aug 2015 14:21:14 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:38011 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751690AbbHZSVM (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Aug 2015 14:21:12 -0400 Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 11:21:00 -0700 From: Paul Mackerras To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Alexander Graf , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Konstantin Khlebnikov Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-ppc tree with the tip tree Message-ID: <20150826182100.GA2662@fergus.ozlabs.ibm.com> References: <20150824155954.0cb8a6a8@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150824155954.0cb8a6a8@canb.auug.org.au> 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 Hi Stephen, On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 03:59:54PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Alexander, > > Today's linux-next merge of the kvm-ppc tree got a conflict in: > > arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c > > between commit: > > c56dadf39761 ("sched/preempt, powerpc, kvm: Use need_resched() instead of should_resched()") > > from the tip tree and commit: > > ec2571650826 ("KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Make use of unused threads when running guests") > > from the kvm-ppc tree. > > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action > is required). The fix isn't quite correct (see below), but the error is benign. > -- > Cheers, > Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au > > diff --cc arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c > index a9f753fb73a8,fad52f226c12..000000000000 > --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c > @@@ -2178,11 -2670,12 +2670,13 @@@ static int kvmppc_run_vcpu(struct kvm_r > vc->runner = vcpu; > if (n_ceded == vc->n_runnable) { > kvmppc_vcore_blocked(vc); > - } else if (should_resched()) { > + } else if (need_resched()) { > + vc->vcore_state = VCORE_PREEMPT; This line is removed in the kvm-ppc tree because it is now in the new kvmppc_vcore_preempt() function. Thus we don't need this line in the merge result. However, having it here just means that we set vc->vcore_state to VCORE_PREEMPT twice. > + kvmppc_vcore_preempt(vc); > /* Let something else run */ > cond_resched_lock(&vc->lock); > - vc->vcore_state = VCORE_INACTIVE; > + if (vc->vcore_state == VCORE_PREEMPT) > + kvmppc_vcore_end_preempt(vc); > } else { > kvmppc_run_core(vc); > } Regards, Paul.