On Nov 16, 2007 3:57 AM, Sven-Thorsten Dietrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Compile fix for new code in -rc2.
I'm not positive about the insertion point...
Subject: compile error fix (needs review)
RT changes __list_splice to require prev and next pointers.
This changes the use in the
Compile fix for new code in -rc2.
I'm not positive about the insertion point...
Subject: compile error fix (needs review)
RT changes __list_splice to require prev and next pointers.
This changes the use in the new code to list_splice_tail,
but the optimal insertion point needs to be
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007, Nelson, Shannon wrote:
first-async_tx.phys;
- __list_splice(new_chain, ioat_chan-used_desc.prev);
+ list_splice_tail(new_chain, ioat_chan-used_desc.prev);
NAK.
These functions do insertions differently. The 'prev' is pointing to
the last valid
On Sat, 17 Nov 2007, Remy Bohmer wrote:
Hello Steven,
Thanks for your reply
The above sounds more like you need a completion.
Funny, I first started with using completion structures, but that did
not work either. I get similar OOPses on all these kind of locking
mechanisms, as long as
