> > What does that break, or was it already broken and this fixes it?
> I think neither. This function is only called at early bootup,
> (start_secondary() ), and most of its callees have interrupts off anyway.
> But maybe we do lose something. Andi, do you have a word on this?
We need to enable them somewhere, but cpu_idle will do it in the end.
So it should be safe to drop it. I guess keeping them disabled the whole
time will be a little safer against potential races.
I added the patch, but might want some cooking in -mm first because this
is always fragile code.
-Andi
-
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]
