lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Recursive deadlock on die_lock
Date
Keith Owens writes: 

> On 14 Oct 2001 17:14:24 -0600,
> ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
>>Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au> writes:
>>> IA64 also has PAL code which is
>>> called directly by the kernel, that PAL code has no unwind data so
>>> failures in PAL code result in bad or incomplete back traces.
>>
>>PAL Ahh!!!!!
>>
>>Please tell me that we are not rely on the firmware to be correct
>>after we have finished initializing the operating system.
>>
>>Please tell me it ain't so. I have nightmares about that kind of setup.
>
> Not only do we rely on it, it is mandated by the IA64 design. Intel
> IA64 System Abstraction Layer, 24535901.pdf. The IA64 kernel calls SAL
> all over the place. grep -ir '\<[ps]al' include/asm-ia64/ arch/ia64/

Oh, goody! What an excellent way to shove CPRM or SSSCA down your throat!
The possibilities are endless...

--
Sam

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:08    [W:0.045 / U:0.488 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site