Re: [PATCH] [19/58] x86_64: Don't use softirq save locks in smp_call_function

On Thursday 19 July 2007 14:16:48 Satyam Sharma wrote:

>
> > Can't do a WARN_ON unfortunately because it could trigger in the
> > panic case.
> 
> But this is not true at all. This function doesn't come anywhere
> on the panic codepath.


You're wrong.

-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/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH] [0/58] First batch of x86 patches for .23
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • [PATCH] [19/58] x86_64: Don't use softirq save locks in smp_call_function
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] [19/58] x86_64: Don't use softirq save locks in smp_call_function
    • From: "Satyam Sharma" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: AFS compile broken
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH try #3] security: Convert LSM into a static interface
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] [19/58] x86_64: Don't use softirq save locks in smp_call_function
• Next by thread: [PATCH] [20/58] x86: Always probe the NMI watchdog
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]