Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 28 Aug 2003 12:31:23 -0700 | From | William Lee Irwin III <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] make voyager work again after the cpumask_t changes |
| |
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com> wrote: >> Most is just simple fixes; however, the needless change from atomic to >> non-atomic operations in smp_invalidate_interrupt() caused me a lot of >> pain to track down since it introduced some very subtle bugs.
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 12:10:16PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > Yes, the generic code was like that too. It was causing lockups. Sorry, I > did not realise that voyager had a private invalidatation implementation. > Officially smp_invalidate_needed should be a cpumask_t and > smp_invalidate_interrupt() should be using cpu_isset() rather than > open-coded bitops. For all those 64-way voyagers out there ;) > (Actually it is legitimate: you may want to run a NR_CPUS=48 kernel on a > 2-way voyager just for testing purposes). I'll drop your patch in as-is, > and maybe Bill can take a look at cpumaskifying it sometime?
I'm not convinced it's worth it; AIUI there are architectural limits to Voyager that prevent it from ever supporting > 32x in hardware, though it could be worth doing so in tandem with an across-the-board all- subarch extension of generic i386 support.
-- wli - 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/
| |