From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.pangeatech.com (pxofc151-phx1.pangeatech.com [63.110.32.151]) by dsl2.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16EF0482A for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2001 11:52:39 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [65.192.22.133] by mail.pangeatech.com (NTMail 7.00.0018/NU8172.00.e2123c13) with ESMTP id tszeiaaa for parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org; Sun, 21 Oct 2001 10:47:54 -0700 Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 10:52:27 -0700 From: Randolph Chung To: parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org Message-ID: <20011021105227.H537@tausq.org> Reply-To: Randolph Chung Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [parisc-linux] small patch for cpu_idle? List-ID: It appears to me that our cpu_idle is not quite right... what do you guys think about this: Index: process.c =================================================================== RCS file: /home/cvs/parisc/linux/arch/parisc/kernel/process.c,v retrieving revision 1.38 diff -u -r1.38 process.c --- process.c 2001/10/09 19:43:35 1.38 +++ process.c 2001/10/21 17:46:53 @@ -67,8 +67,8 @@ current->counter = -100; while (1) { - while (!current->need_resched) { - } + while (!current->need_resched) + continue; schedule(); check_pgt_cache(); } otherwise when cpu_idle gets called we might get stuck in an inf loop (which happens, for example, when fsck requires manual intervention on startup). randolph -- @..@ http://www.TauSq.org/ (----) ( >__< ) ^^ ~~ ^^