From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.ebshome.net (gate.ebshome.net [64.81.67.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits)) (Client CN "gate.ebshome.net", Issuer "gate.ebshome.net" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2DCD2BDA1 for ; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 04:35:54 +1000 (EST) Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:35:51 -0700 From: Eugene Surovegin To: Jaap-Jan Boor Message-ID: <20041007183551.GA22982@gate.ebshome.net> References: <200410071529.12909.g.jaeger@sysgo.com> <20041007173449.GA3540@gate.ebshome.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [BUG][PPC32] Preemption patch for 2.4 Kernels List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 08:21:54PM +0200, Jaap-Jan Boor wrote: > > On 7-okt-04, at 19:34, Eugene Surovegin wrote: > > >On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 03:29:12PM +0200, Gerhard Jaeger wrote: > >>maybe the 2.4 series is somewhat outdatet, but nevertheless used in > >>several embedded systems and also with your preemption patches. > >>During some investigations, we found out that the patches found on > >>http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rml/preempt-kernel/ > >>contain a severe bug, when using the patches on PPC systems. > > > >Yes, it's a known problem with rml preempt patches - DON'T USE THEM > >on PPC. I sent him similar patch _two_ years ago - nothing happened. > >MVL tree is IMHO better place to get preempt stuff for 2.4 - it's > >actually tested and works. > > yes, because there are more changes then only the forgotten '{' > You're right, there were other (not so obvious) problems which rml patch (like preempt_enable_no_resched() in irq.c::preempt_intercept()), maybe others I don't remember now)... -- Eugene