Ed,
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Edward Donovan wrote:
> So, let me try to confirm some things now, so I can learn as I go. To
> spell out what's in the new patch:
>
> The later line,
>
> action = desc->action;
>
> should have been this all along?
>
> action = action->next;
Yes. My bad :(
> And with that fixed, the other test can go. Which is good, now,
> because it was creating locking problems for you.
>
> Ok, thanks for bearing with me. I'll repeat the test here, some
> more, but they've generally behaved consistently and probably will
> keep showing the same.
>
> I might as well add that I would happily ship one of these computers,
> with a reliably spurious interrupt, to Thomas in Germany. if that
> would help for testing.
I'm always happy to have machines which expose strange symptoms.
Thanks,
tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
