On Wed, 2 May 2007 11:38:47 -0400
Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 11:37:48AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Doesn't apply against the latest ff tree. Can you please regenerate,
> > not losing whatever change caused it to reject?
>
> What's the ff tree? Is 'f' next to
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:49:01PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> I want to get rid of PG_reserved eventually. Is it possible to use PG_arch_1
> for this?
Yup.
Andrew - Feel free to drop this or just sit on it until I send a
replacement. Whichever is easier.
Jeff
-
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 11:37:48AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Doesn't apply against the latest ff tree. Can you please regenerate,
> not losing whatever change caused it to reject?
What's the ff tree? Is 'f' next to 'm' on your keyboard?
It depends on the tas() elimination patch, which I sent to
On Tuesday 01 May 2007 20:21:57 Jeff Dike wrote:
> Rearrange the i386 cmpxchg code to allow atomic.h to get it without
> needing to include system.h. This kills warnings in the UML build
> from atomic.h about implicit declarations of cmpxchg symbols. The
> i386 build presumably isn't seeing this
