From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: sboyd@codeaurora.org (Stephen Boyd)
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 14:21:46 -0800
Subject: [PATCH 01/01] arm: fix a preempt_count() corruption for
 CONFIG_PREEMPT=n
In-Reply-To: <20130104084850.4553bc6f.pkluba@dension.com>
References: <20121215085129.71d203b2.pkluba@dension.com>
 <50D10224.30600@codeaurora.org>
 <20121219000139.GV14363@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <50E4D39C.1030001@codeaurora.org>
 <20130104084850.4553bc6f.pkluba@dension.com>
Message-ID: <50E755FA.8040609@codeaurora.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 01/03/13 23:48, Patrik, Kluba wrote:
> Sorry for being late, was on holiday. Yes, you were right,
> CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT (after breaking dependency on CONFIG_PREEMPT -
> this is how I caught the exact place) and CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP was
> enabled due to bug hunting in own code (and found yet another at an
> unexpected place). 
> I have chosen #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT to match with assembly code, but
> your solution seems more reasonable.

Did you test my patch? If so, can I get your tested by please so I can
stick it in the patch tracker?

Thanks,
Stephen

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation