Re: [patch 07/15] Basic x86_64 support

[Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org>]

On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 04:28:06PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 07:14:37AM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 04:06:20PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 07:04:45AM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 02:39:00PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > > > > That doesn't make much sense here. tasklet will only run when interrupts
> > > > > > > are enabled, and that is much later. You could move it to there.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Where?  Keep in mind it's really only x86_64 that isn't able to break
> > > > > > sooner.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The local_irq_enable() call in init/main.c:start_kernel()
> > > > 
> > > > But as I say, only x86_64 needs this kind of delay.
> > > 
> > > I don't think that's correct. Interrupts should be disabled on all
> > > architectures until that.
> > 
> > Right, but we can run sooner elsewhere.  It's only x86_64 where we can't
> > run when our commandline bits are parsed and need to wait.
> 
> Why can't you run on x86-64 early? 

As I said earlier:
"
> If you want to run gdb earlier you need to do it without a tasklet.

We really would like to try again once stacks are setup (IOW, once
if ((&__get_cpu_var(init_tss))[0].ist[0])) is true).
"

IOW, when we parse the params on x86_64 this isn't true (or rather it
wasn't true as of 2.6.9'ish, if this has changed I'd be glad to retest
things).

-- 
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/