On Sat, 5 Nov 2005, Andi Kleen wrote: > I don't think it's a good idea. Relying on nested faults in oops > is a bit unsafe because it could lead to recursive faults in the worst case. Good point. > Better keep the if Except the condition is wrong. Presence of CR4 could be tested elsewhere though, with the result being the condition here. Maciej - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: 2.6.14: CR4 not needed to be inspected on the 486 anymore?
- From: Zachary Amsden <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.14: CR4 not needed to be inspected on the 486 anymore?
- References:
- 2.6.14: CR4 not needed to be inspected on the 486 anymore?
- From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.14: CR4 not needed to be inspected on the 486 anymore?
- From: Zachary Amsden <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.14: CR4 not needed to be inspected on the 486 anymore?
- From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.14: CR4 not needed to be inspected on the 486 anymore?
- From: Zachary Amsden <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.14: CR4 not needed to be inspected on the 486 anymore?
- From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
- 2.6.14: CR4 not needed to be inspected on the 486 anymore?
- Prev by Date: ACPI and PRREMPT bug
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH]: Clean up of __alloc_pages
- Previous by thread: Re: 2.6.14: CR4 not needed to be inspected on the 486 anymore?
- Next by thread: Re: 2.6.14: CR4 not needed to be inspected on the 486 anymore?
- Index(es):
 |