> > What does that break, or was it already broken and this fixes it? > I think neither. This function is only called at early bootup, > (start_secondary() ), and most of its callees have interrupts off anyway. > But maybe we do lose something. Andi, do you have a word on this?
We need to enable them somewhere, but cpu_idle will do it in the end. So it should be safe to drop it. I guess keeping them disabled the whole time will be a little safer against potential races. I added the patch, but might want some cooking in -mm first because this is always fragile code. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
