On Friday 03 February 2006 12:01, Eric Dumazet wrote: > Andi Kleen a écrit : > > On Friday 03 February 2006 10:17, Andrew Morton wrote: > >> It seems that powerpc has gone and changed their implementation of percpu > >> data so that there is no memory allocated for not-possible CPUs. To save a > >> bit of RAM. > >> > >> This means that any code which does > >> > >> for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++) > >> touch(percpudata(i)) > >> > >> will explode on powerpc. > > > > It also explodes since some time on x86-64. > > > > But I added a workaround now (or rather sent one and Linus dropped it) > > to point the not possible CPUs to the reference data and not free it. > > With that violating that protocol is mostly harmless. > > > > Later the plan was to point it to unmapped data to catch all users. > > Maybe you can port the following i386 patch to x86_64 ? (I dont have a x86_64 > test machine at this moment)
Yes good idea. I will add it after 2.6.16. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
