Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> George Anzinger wrote:
> >
> > The notion of releasing a spin lock by initializing it seems IMHO, on
> > the face of it, way off. Firstly the protected area is no longer
> > protected which could lead to undefined errors/ crashes and secondly,
> > any future use of spinl
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> George Anzinger wrote:
> >
> > The notion of releasing a spin lock by initializing it seems IMHO, on
> > the face of it, way off. Firstly the protected area is no longer
> > protected which could lead to undefined errors/ crashes and secondly,
> > any
George Anzinger wrote:
>
> The notion of releasing a spin lock by initializing it seems IMHO, on
> the face of it, way off. Firstly the protected area is no longer
> protected which could lead to undefined errors/ crashes and secondly,
> any future use of spinlocks to control preemption could ha
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 09:15:54 -0800,
George Anzinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The notion of releasing a spin lock by initializing it seems IMHO, on
>the face of it, way off.
Normally it would be, but these are NMI and panic messages. The system
is pretty dead at that point, getting the messag
The notion of releasing a spin lock by initializing it seems IMHO, on
the face of it, way off. Firstly the protected area is no longer
protected which could lead to undefined errors/ crashes and secondly,
any future use of spinlocks to control preemption could have a lot of
trouble with this, pri
John Kacur wrote:
>
> When attempting to compile test11-pre2, I get the following compile
> error.
>
> arch/i386/mm/mm.o: In function `do_page_fault':
> arch/i386/mm/mm.o(.text+0x781): undefined reference to `bust_spinlocks'
> make: *** [vmlinux] Error 1
It was inside an ifdef. Apologies.
Thi
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 00:32:49 -0500,
John Kacur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>When attempting to compile test11-pre2, I get the following compile
>error.
>
>arch/i386/mm/mm.o: In function `do_page_fault':
>arch/i386/mm/mm.o(.text+0x781): undefined reference to `bust_spinlocks'
>make: *** [vmlinux] E
Keith Owens wrote:
> Index: 0-test11-pre2.1/arch/i386/kernel/traps.c
> --- 0-test11-pre2.1/arch/i386/kernel/traps.c Fri, 10 Nov 2000 13:10:37 +1100 kaos
>(linux-2.4/A/c/1_traps.c 1.1.2.2.1.1.2.1.2.3.1.2.3.1.1.2 644)
> +++ 0-test11-pre2.1(w)/arch/i386/kernel/traps.c Fri, 10 Nov 2000 15:56:54 +1100
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 00:32:49 -0500,
John Kacur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>When attempting to compile test11-pre2, I get the following compile
>error.
>
>arch/i386/mm/mm.o: In function `do_page_fault':
>arch/i386/mm/mm.o(.text+0x781): undefined reference to `bust_spinlocks'
>make: *** [vmlinux] E
9 matches
Mail list logo
