From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Mallick, Asit K" Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 05:43:46 +0000 Subject: RE: [Linux-ia64] High fpu register corruption (PATCH) Message-Id: List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org Yes, it can be same as 2.5. Thanks, Asit > -----Original Message----- > From: David Mosberger [mailto:davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com] > Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 9:41 PM > To: Bjorn Helgaas > Cc: davidm@hpl.hp.com; David Mosberger; Mallick, Asit K; > linux-ia64@linuxia64.org; Chris Mason; dstownse@us.ibm.com > Subject: Re: [Linux-ia64] High fpu register corruption (PATCH) > > > >>>>> On Wed, 28 May 2003 22:25:37 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas > said: > > Bjorn> OK, ignore my questions about ptrace.c and setup.c. > Questions still > Bjorn> open: > > Bjorn> arch/ia64/kernel/signal.c: > Bjorn> restore_sigcontext() changes look equivalent, but have > Bjorn> gratuitous differences from 2.5 (reversed sense of test, > Bjorn> comment) > > Bjorn> arch/ia64/kernel/traps.c: > Bjorn> Gratuitous whitespace differences. > > Bjorn> include/asm-ia64/processor.h: > Bjorn> ia64_is_local_fpu_owner(), ia64_set_local_fpu_owner(): > Bjorn> these look functionally equivalent in 2.4 and 2.5. > Bjorn> Can they be made identical? > > Bjorn> include/asm-ia64/system.h: > Bjorn> IA64_HAS_EXTRA_STATE() and switch_to() appear to be > Bjorn> identical in 2.4 and 2.5 except for whitespace changes. > Bjorn> Can they be made identical? > > Not sure if those are intentional. I of course would prefer if 2.5 > were followed. ;-) Asit? > > --daivd >