Hi Jean,
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Sep 2012 14:03:27 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Jean Delvare wrote:
>> > It doesn't seem this spinlock was properly initialized.
>>
>> Quiet possible. There's no SMP on m68k, so all sp
Hi Geert,
On Thu, 6 Sep 2012 14:03:27 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > It doesn't seem this spinlock was properly initialized.
>
> Quiet possible. There's no SMP on m68k, so all spinlock ops expand to nothing.
Can we apply my patch still
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Jean Delvare wrote:
> It doesn't seem this spinlock was properly initialized.
Quiet possible. There's no SMP on m68k, so all spinlock ops expand to nothing.
> Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare
> Cc: Finn Thain
> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven
> ---
> I can't even build-test
It doesn't seem this spinlock was properly initialized.
Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare
Cc: Finn Thain
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven
---
I can't even build-test this.
drivers/block/swim.c |1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
--- linux-3.6-rc4.orig/drivers/block/swim.c 2012-07-21 22:58:29.00
4 matches
Mail list logo