> Instead of introducing the panic lock, as an alternative we could move
> smp_send_stop() to the beginning of panic(). Eric told me that the
> function is currently "insufficiently reliable" for that, but perhaps we
> could make it more reliable.
That's tough to do. We are in panic because somet
On Tue, 2011-11-01 at 16:04 -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 01:34:19PM +0100, Michael Holzheu wrote:
> > Hello Andrew, hello linux-arch,
> >
> > > Well OK. Maybe some architectures do have this problem - who would
> > > notice? If that is the case, we just made the failure cas
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 01:34:19PM +0100, Michael Holzheu wrote:
> Hello Andrew, hello linux-arch,
>
> > Well OK. Maybe some architectures do have this problem - who would
> > notice? If that is the case, we just made the failure cases much more
> > common. Could you check, please?
>
> @linux-
