Re: [patch] scheduler bugfix, SMP, 2.4.0-test7

2000-08-29 Thread Albert D. Cahalan
David S. Miller writes: > The problem not FASTCALL, which is a NOP on sparc anyways. The > problem is the fact that people expect the following to work: ... > And it doesn't on Sparc because the flags are stored in the same CPU > register as the current register window. > > Therefore you cannot

Re: [patch] scheduler bugfix, SMP, 2.4.0-test7

2000-08-29 Thread David S. Miller
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 16:13:22 +0100 (BST) From: Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Ingo, the local flags stuff on Sparc, remember? Maybe its time to have FASTCALLFLAGS that is different for sparc ? The problem not FASTCALL, which is a NOP on sparc anyways. The problem is the fact tha

RE: [patch] scheduler bugfix, SMP, 2.4.0-test7

2000-08-29 Thread Dimitris Michailidis
On 29-Aug-2000 Ingo Molnar wrote: > i agree fully. The attached patch against test8-pre1 changes > schedule_idle() from inline to FASTCALL - things look much nicer with this > one applied. > > -static inline void reschedule_idle(struct task_struct * p, unsigned long flags) > +static FASTCALL(voi

Re: [patch] scheduler bugfix, SMP, 2.4.0-test7

2000-08-29 Thread Alan Cox
>i agree fully. The attached patch against test8-pre1 changes >schedule_idle() from inline to FASTCALL - things look much nicer with this >one applied. > > Ingo, the local flags stuff on Sparc, remember? Maybe its time to have FASTCALLFLAGS that is different for sparc ? - To unsubsc