[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1165851624.7764.3.camel@imap.mvista.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 07:40:24 -0800
From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -rt][RESEND] spin lock imbalance in ibm emac
On Mon, 2006-12-11 at 10:27 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com> wrote:
>
> > Sent this a long time ago, still exists.
> >
> > Signed-Off-By: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
>
> hm, what does this do, and why isnt it upstream?
AFAIK, those locks are added in -rt . I'm not sure how they got in
there, but they fix that driver when running in a thread. The driver has
unsafe SMP locking, but the only system it runs on (PPC4xx) is
uniprocessor. So it's not broken upstream per se.
Dainel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists