From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren) Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:08:48 -0800 Subject: [GIT PULL v2] ARM: arm-soc fixes for 3.8 In-Reply-To: References: <20121220163814.GA29557@quad.lixom.net> <20121220175639.GA14363@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20121220184525.GC21056@atomide.com> Message-ID: <20121220190847.GF21056@atomide.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org * Linus Torvalds [121220 11:03]: > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > I'm seeing the "BUG: spinlock bad magic on CPU#0" issue > > reported and fixed here: > > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-arm-kernel&m=135594868503683&w=2 > > > > But that's probably been already posted as a proper patch > > somewhere? > > Hmm. The patch there looks better than any alternative I can think of. > It uses the same spinlock name for the whole array, but I think it's > only used for lockdep printouts, so that should be fine. > > Send me the patch with signed-off and tested-by, and perhaps have a > few more people test it. The powerpc and sparc people both use it in > their 32-bit versions and have responsible maintainers, so it might be > worth it double-checking with BenH and DaveM about it, just in case. > Added to the Cc. Looks like it's been posted to LKML as: [PATCH] lib: atomic64: Initialize locks statically to fix early users Replied to it with my tested-by if you want to pick it up. Regards, Tony