> Please try this:
>
> --- a/drivers/char/tty_io.c.orig 2005-01-14 21:11:58.002189784 -0200
> +++ b/drivers/char/tty_io.c 2005-01-14 21:12:53.743715784 -0200
> @@ -718,7 +718,7 @@
> wake_up_interruptible(&tty->write_wait);
> }
>
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tty_wakeup);
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(t
Rusty Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> static inline void do_timer_interrupt_hook(struct pt_regs *regs)
> {
> -do_timer(regs);
> +/* i386 brings up CPU before core is setup. */
> +if (unlikely(!cpu_online(smp_processor_id(
> +jiffies64++;
> +else
> +
On Sat, 2005-01-15 at 06:23 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> I shortly considered redoing the boot process, but then it looked
> too risky to me.
>
> e.g. I guess on x86-64 it wouldn't be that difficult, just a bit of work,
> but on i386 with all the weird hardware it could be quite destabilizing.
> B
Having disabled ALL mouse functionality (including 'mousedev'), I
compiled 2.6.9-rc2-bk2. On bootup, keyboard input worked great.
So many it's a conflict with the mouse driver then.
BTW, I haven an MSI NEO K8T FIS2R motherboard with an athlon64/3200+,
for what it's worth.
I will follow up with lo
> I don't get it. By the time the secondaries enter the idle loop, they've
> already run init_timers_cpu() anyway. You patch doesn't address a
The notifier uns only after smp_prepare_cpus and then all the synchronization
is long done.
> secondary taking a timer interrupt prior to the BP havin
The "addr" member in the time-interpolator is sometimes used as a
function-pointer and sometimes as an I/O-memory pointer. The attached
patch tells sparse that this is OK.
Signed-off-by: David Mosberger-Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
= kernel/timer.c 1.109 vs edited =
--- 1.109/kernel/timer.c
Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 10:28:41PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > This fixes a long standing race in 2.6 i386/x86-64 SMP boot.
> > > The per CPU timers would only get initialized after an secondary
> > >
7 matches
Mail list logo
