lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Mar]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRE: 2.6.4-mm1
Date
From
I don't see any problem after the modification as far as I tested. I
tested both UP and SMP kernel with CONFIG_PCI_USE_VECTOR = Y or N (with
ACPI enabled).

Jun
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Andrew Morton [mailto:akpm@osdl.org]
>Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 12:31 AM
>To: Nakajima, Jun
>Cc: subodh@btopenworld.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>Subject: Re: 2.6.4-mm1
>
>"Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> I checked and tried several things, and I think CONFIG_PCI_USE_VECTOR
is
>> a red herring. 2.6.4-mm1 did boot with CONFIG_PCI_USE_VECTOR = Y or
N as
>> long as kernel preemption is disabled. It did not boot regardless of
>> CONFIG_PCI_USE_VECTOR if kernel preemption is enabled. I see the
>> complaints
>> bad: scheduling while atomic!
>> at various spots.
>
>Please delete the spin_unlock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock); five lines from
the
>end of fs/mpage.c.
>
>I assume Subodh did that, but all we know is that it "doesn't boot".

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:01    [W:0.034 / U:0.360 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site