* Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ah, i understand. So i guess a stupid udelay_serialized() which > > takes a global spinlock would solve these sort of races? But i guess > > making them more likely to trigger would lead to a better kernel in > > the end ... > > Better to just fix the drivers. I don't think that will take too many > days after everyone is back working.
ok. > > doing it - but we'll do the plunge in v2.6.25 and make > > io_delay=udelay the default, hm? Thomas has a real 386DX system, if > > that doesnt break > > For processors with TSC I think we should aim for 2.6.25 to do this > and to have the major other _p fixups done. I pity whoever does stuff > like the scc drivers but most of the rest isn't too bad. ok, sounds good to me. The current io_delay= stuff for v2.6.25 is already shaped as a debugging/transition helper, towards complete elimination of _p() uses. Ingo -- 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/