Re: [bug] Re: [PATCH 4/12] riscom8: fix SMP brokenness

2008-02-20 Thread Alan Cox
> This is unfortunately very low on the priority stack. I was a bit > surprised when it went in, honestly, since I hadn't gotten any "it > works" test reports yet... but that's my fault for not keeping akpm up > to date. > > We'll want to revert this for 2.6.25 release, if it doesn't get

Re: [bug] Re: [PATCH 4/12] riscom8: fix SMP brokenness

2008-02-20 Thread Jeff Garzik
Ingo Molnar wrote: * Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: After analyzing the elements that save_flags/cli/sti/restore_flags were protecting, convert their usages to a global spinlock (the easiest and most obvious next-step). There were some usages of flags being intentionally cached,

Re: [bug] Re: [PATCH 4/12] riscom8: fix SMP brokenness

2008-02-20 Thread Jeff Garzik
Ingo Molnar wrote: * Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: After analyzing the elements that save_flags/cli/sti/restore_flags were protecting, convert their usages to a global spinlock (the easiest and most obvious next-step). There were some usages of flags being intentionally cached,

Re: [bug] Re: [PATCH 4/12] riscom8: fix SMP brokenness

2008-02-20 Thread Alan Cox
This is unfortunately very low on the priority stack. I was a bit surprised when it went in, honestly, since I hadn't gotten any it works test reports yet... but that's my fault for not keeping akpm up to date. We'll want to revert this for 2.6.25 release, if it doesn't get fixed up.