Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Sat, 19 Feb 2000 18:44:28 +0100 (MET) | | From | Gerard Roudier <> | | Subject | Re: 2.3.46 Boot Failure |
| |
On Sat, 19 Feb 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
[ ... ]
> >glad to hear DEC/COMPAQ ingenieers about the status of the > >__delay()/__udelay() stuff for alpha in Linuxes. For now, Pamela has to > > There's just an attempt to fix it. It's a patch from Jay Estabrook, I have > uploaded it here but I don't need it with my hardware: > > ftp://ftp.*.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/andrea/patches/v2.2/2.2.14/alpha_delay-fix_jay-2.2.14.gz > > Maybe Jay can add some comment about this. The patch is strightforward, it > make sure that the udelay code is allocated in a misaligned address.
I will add my comments too: ;-)
Why sticking with inlining for this stuff? Getting rid of inlining does insure this stuff be aligned in everything the same way and would likely fix the problem forever. Fixing it in memory would not affect precision for micro-second even on early alpha machines, in my opinion, given clock frequencies used on alpha since years.
The udelay stuff is designed to waste deterministic amounts of time and some minimal precision requirement should be specified. Otherwise it is just usable at nothing good.
Gérard.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |