In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Tue, 20 Jun 2006 09:50:15 +0200, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> Thanks for the very fast patch, but:
>
> > /* Assume hlt works */
> > - halt();
> > - for(;;);
> > + for (;;)
> > + halt();
>
> The comment above seems to hint at this code in arch/i386/kernel/smp.c/
> stop_this_cpu() which does proper hlt checks:
>
> if (cpu_data[smp_processor_id()].hlt_works_ok)
> for(;;) halt();
> for (;;);
>
> So I'm unsure what happens if hlt is not supported properly. Maybe
> there's an invalid opcode exception in a loop then.
Some ancient CPUs never wake up on interrupt after a halt. See
include/asm-i386/bugs.h::check_hlt().
--
Chuck
"You can't read a newspaper if you can't read." --George W. Bush
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
