Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 4 Mar 2001 01:02:31 +0100 (CET) | From | Francis Galiegue <> | Subject | Re: [kernel] Re: [PATCH] 2.4.2: cure the kapm-idled taking (100-epsilon)% CPU time |
| |
On Sat, 3 Mar 2001, Philipp Rumpf wrote:
> > Well, from reading the source, I don't see how this can break APM... What am I > > missing? > > apm_bios_call must not be called with two identical pointers for > two different registers. >
OK, my bad... By replacing the call I made with this:
u32 dummy, a, b, c, d;
if (apm_bios_call(APM_FUNC_IDLE, 0, 0, &dummy, &a, &b, &c, &d)) return 0;
then the situation is back to "normal"...
Just one more thing though: in apm_bios_call_simple():
[...] APM_DO_SAVE_SEGS; { int cx, dx, si; [...]
Aren't cx, dx and si really meant to be u32?
-- Francis Galiegue, fg@mandrakesoft.com - Normand et fier de l'être "Programming is a race between programmers, who try and make more and more idiot-proof software, and universe, which produces more and more remarkable idiots. Until now, universe leads the race" -- R. Cook
- 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/
| |